THE ROLE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS
Floride Hawkins Carpenter
A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication.
Chapel Hill
2005
Approved by:
Advisor: Professor Patricia Curtin
Reader: Professor Dulcie Straughan
Reader: Professor Steve May
ii
© 2005 Floride Hawkins Carpenter ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
iii
ABSTRACT
FLORIDE HAWKINS CARPENTER: The Role of Public Relations in Socially Responsible Business
(Under the direction of Pat Curtin)
Public relations professionals need to understand their role in order to contribute,
participate and potentially help shape the future of business through corporate social
responsibility. This study examines how public relations is practiced in a socially
responsible organization through a case study of a senior public relations manager working in
a socially responsible company.
The basic premise of this study is that public relations in a socially responsible
organization will exhibit characteristics of “excellence” as defined by Grunig, Grunig, and
Dozier (2002). Specifically this includes the organizational role enacted by the public
relations professional and the model of practice employed by the public relations professional.
iv
This thesis is dedicated to my grandmother, Floride Hawkins Carpenter. It is also submitted in honor of my grandfather, Ernest W. Carpenter,
and a very special human being, Lorene “Katy” Kennedy.
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A project of this magnitude requires a network of support. I am particularly grateful to Eileen McComb and Rich Peters for making the study possible, and to Kal Goldberg, Dick Hyde, and my parents, Bill and Cantey Carpenter, for their unyielding encouragement and support.
vi
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. x
Chapter
I INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................1
The Current State of Corporate Reputation ...................................................................1
The Case for Corporate Social Responsibility...............................................................2
The Role of Public Relations in Corporate Social Responsibility.................................5
The Purpose of This Study.............................................................................................7
II LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................................................9
Public Relations: Models of Practice and Organizational Roles ...................................9
Public Relations Models ..................................................................................10
Public Relations Roles .....................................................................................15
Connecting Public Relations Roles and Models..............................................19
Public Relations and Corporate Social…………………… …………….. Responsibility: Opportunities and Influence ...............................................................21
Corporate Social Responsibility Origins and Key Concepts….. .....................22
Environmental Assessment..............................................................................25
vii
Stakeholder Management.................................................................................27
Issues Management..........................................................................................29
Implications for Public Relations.....................................................................31
Research Questions......................................................................................................34
III METHODS… ..................................................................................................................35
Sampling Strategy........................................................................................................35
Method….. ...................................................................................................................39
Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................42
Case Study ...................................................................................................................45
Benjamin Moore & Co.....................................................................................45
National Paint and Coatings Association and Coatings Care®................................... 54
Benjamin Moore’s Community Responsibility Days ......................................56
Benjamin Moore’s Director of Corporate Communication .............................60
IV RESULTS…. ...................................................................................................................63
Roles……. ...................................................................................................................63
Models…......................................................................................................................75
Social Responsiveness .................................................................................................81
Additional Themes.......................................................................................................82
Summary…..................................................................................................................88
V DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................91
Role Enactment............................................................................................................91
Communication Models...............................................................................................92
Limitations ...................................................................................................................96
viii
Areas for Future Research ...........................................................................................97
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................98
APPENDIX………................................................................................................................103
REFERENCES…. .................................................................................................................104
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page 1. Activities of four distinct roles of communication managers ..................................................17
2. Wood’s corporate social performance model ..........................................................................24
3. Search for case study research on public relations roles and corporate social responsibility .................................................................................................37 4. Subject assessment of contribution to specific role enactment activities ................................74
5. Communications role in managing stakeholder relationships .................................................83
x
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Director of Corporate Communications Responsibilities ........................................................62
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
Corporate reputation is at an all-time low, which spells trouble for business leaders who
generally believe reputation is a critical factor in business performance. Proponents of
corporate social responsibility claim that one of the benefits of being responsible is the
positive impact on corporate reputation and therefore business success. While public
relations is generally accepted as having responsibility for corporate reputation, there is some
debate surrounding the role public relations should play in managing and executing corporate
social responsibility programs. Existing research on public relations roles in organizations
offers some clues on the role public relations should play in a socially responsible
corporation. The focus of this study is to test these theories through a case study of a public
relations manager in a socially responsible organization.
The Current State of Corporate Reputation
In the past five years, the actions of corporations and company leaders have received a
great deal of attention and criticism. From the dot-com collapse and scandals involving
Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and HealthSouth to the federal investigation of Halliburton’s Iraq
contracts, Wal-Mart’s labor practices, and the latest verdict on Merck’s handling of Vioxx,
the public’s trust in today’s corporations is on the decline. A June 2005 Gallup Poll (Saad,
2005) showed that public trust in institutions is at an all-time low. Only 22% of respondents
2
reported “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in big business, down seven points from
2000. Big business’ lowest ever score was 21% in 1995. In the most recent Reputation
Quotient survey, administered by Harris Interactive and the Reputation Institute, 68% of
respondents graded the reputations of U.S. business as "not good" or "terrible" – only a
slightly better outlook than last year’s 74% (Alsop, 2004). This paints a troubling picture for
business leaders who generally believe that reputation is critical to bottom-line performance.
In the Corporate Reputation Watch survey of U.S. CEOs, 94% of respondents agree that
reputation affects an organization’s ability to achieve business objectives (Hoog, 2001).
The Case for Corporate Social Responsibility
Not surprisingly, the past five years have also brought greater focus to the concept of
corporate social responsibility and its close correlates: business ethics, corporate citizenship,
corporate governance, corporate accountability, and sustainability. For example, a key word
search for the phrase “corporate social responsibility” on Factiva yielded 5,812 articles in the
past year. The same search for the year 2000 produced only 654 articles.
According to Business for Social Responsibility (2003), a membership and consulting
organization, corporate social responsibility is “achieving commercial success in ways that
honor ethical values and respect people, communities, and the natural environment . . . a
comprehensive set of policies, practices and programs that are integrated into business
operations, supply chains, and decision-making processes throughout the company” (p. 1).
The Council on Economic Priorities’ Corporate Report Card (1998) defines corporate social
responsibility by measuring corporate performance in seven areas that together make up a
company’s social responsibility “report card.” These are environmental responsibility,
3
women’s advancement, minority advancement, charitable giving, community outreach,
family benefits, workplace issues, and disclosure of information.
Corporate social responsibility grew up as a concept during the consumer and ecology
movements of the 1960s and 1970s, significant as a time of increased environmental and
social activism, severe corporate environmental and social crises, as well as landmark
legislation to regulate worker health and safety, product safety, and pollution. The resurgence
of interest may be a business backlash in response to the anti-corporate campaigns and anti-
globalization protests in the late 1990s, according to the Economist’s David Ian (2005). Ian
claims companies view corporate social responsibility as “a means to avoid Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGO) and reputational flak, and to mitigate the rougher edges
and consequences of capitalism” (para. 17). Indeed, corporations appear to have been less
concerned with corporate social responsibility pre-Enron. Walsh in 1999 argued that “the
current language of business does not seem to allow for talk rooted in notions of compassion
and caring” (p. 8).
Corporate social responsibility is based on a set of competing ideologies regarding the role
of business in society. On one side of the debate is economist Milton Friedman (1970) who
argues that “there is only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and
engage in activities designed to increase its profits” (p. 91). On the other side is Hawken
(1993) who claimed, "The ultimate purpose of business is not, or should not be, simply to
make money. Nor is it merely a system of making and selling things. The promise of
business is to increase the general well-being of humankind” (p. 1). As the concept has
evolved, researchers on both sides have criticized the concept both from an economic
perspective (for example D. Henderson, 2001) and an activist perspective (for example,
4
Blowfield & Frynas; 2005; Mander, 1992; Newell, 2005). Still others maintain that
corporate social responsibility, if carefully implemented, can be a valid management
approach that not only benefits society, but makes good business sense (for example, Bendell,
2005; “Finding strategic,” 2004; Gillis & Spring, 2001; Hatcher, 2003; J. Henderson, 2000;
Utting, 2005).
Proponents of corporate social responsibility claim that socially responsible companies
will reap many benefits. Rodbourne, Dercks, and Ross (2000) argued that “ever-stronger
signals are telling global corporations that to do well, they should do good” (p. D10). The
authors cited a survey conducted by The Wall Street Journal International, in which 55% of
U.S. respondents said they always take into account a company’s ethics and values when
purchasing products and services. Increased sales is one of the four main benefits of
corporate social responsibility cited in a special report from the European Business Forum
(cited in Alfonso & Sharma, 2005). The other benefits include corporate reputation,
employee retention and recruitment, and operational efficiency. Burnishing reputation and
attracting employees are frequently mentioned by those struggling to establish the corporate
social responsibility return on investment, including Business Week in a recent investigation
by Grow, Hamm, and Lee (2005). The fact that Fortune magazine uses social responsibility
as one criterion to measure and create its popular list of “Most Admired” companies suggests
that corporate social responsibility is indeed a key factor in maintaining a positive reputation.
Clearly business leaders who make corporate social responsibility a priority view it as an
investment that yields positive returns, and one of the biggest returns is a positive corporate
reputation. Even companies like GE are stepping up efforts to become what current CEO
Jeffrey Immelt calls “virtuous,” according to research on that company, which is “known for
5
hard-driving management and delivering market-beating shareholder returns” (Gunther, 2004,
para. 2). Apparently decisions on what type of corporate social responsibility activities to
engage in depends on a sort of “business calculus” that helps to measure whether or not the
activity will benefit the company’s reputation. The key for most business leaders is that the
strong reputational impact of corporate social responsibility is good for business. In the
words of Immelt, “if this wasn’t good for business, we probably wouldn’t do it” (Gunther,
2004, para. 24).
The Role of Public Relations in Corporate Social Responsibility
It is widely accepted that “the profession of public relations is designed to manage the
reputation of organizations” (Eisenberg & Goodall, 1997, p. 312). In a recent survey of
CEOs, 85% responded that public relations handles corporate reputation (“Wrestling with
rules,” 2003). That is because “public relations” in business circles today is generally
synonymous with “corporate communications” and, according to Richard Edelman (2004),
president and chief executive officer of Edelman Public Relations, “strong corporate
reputation is built through continuous communication with interdependent stakeholders,
including employees, media, investors, consumers, regulators, academics and retailers” (p.
128).
Many public relations professionals believe there is a strong connection between public
relations and corporate social responsibility, and that public relations professionals play a big
role in making this a priority for business. Bennett Freeman, former U.S. deputy assistant
secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor, and now managing director for
corporate responsibility at Burson-Marsteller, claims that, “In this new era of scrutiny,
6
corporate reputation and corporate responsibility are inseparable” (“Corporate
responsibility,” 2005, para. 9). Perhaps the discovery of this link is why corporate social
responsibility appears to be reaching the top of the priority list for public relations
professionals. In a PR Week Op-Ed, Wes Pedersen (2005), director of corporate
communications and public relations at the Public Affairs Council, implores public relations
managers to “emphasize corporate social responsibility’s value in ’05.” This echoes the
words of Harold Burson, founding chairman at global public relations agency, Burson-
Marsteller, who in a 1996 speech wrote, “In planning for social change, the role of the public
relations executive is critical” (p. 18).
But are these expectations realistic? Does the public relations function in organizations
have influence on the organization’s actions in addition to its communications – all of which
influence its reputation? Conventional wisdom tells us that the way public relations managers
approach corporate reputation management is all about “spin” –some may even all it
propaganda. Many believe these one-way communications, such as news releases, executive
speeches, brochures, and websites, are designed to manipulate the public. Indeed, one of the
criticisms of corporate social responsibility is that management of corporate social
responsibility initiatives is too closely linked to the public relations department: “though
playing an important tactical role, such departments are often geared towards rebutting
criticism, and tend to operate at a distance from strategic decision-making within the
company” (Ian, 2005, para. 23).
In summary, corporate reputation is at an all-time low, which spells trouble for business
leaders who generally believe reputation is a critical factor in business performance.
Proponents of corporate social responsibility claim that one of the benefits of being
7
responsible is the positive impact on corporate reputation and therefore business success.
While public relations is generally accepted as the having responsibility for corporate
reputation, there is some debate surrounding the role public relations should play in
managing and executing corporate social responsibility programs.
The Purpose of This Study
The purpose of this study is to explore the role of public relations in a socially responsible
corporation to determine its influence and opportunities. There is a long history of research
on public relations models and roles but very little that connects these theories and practices
to corporate social responsibility. Given continued trends of globalization, heightened
government and public scrutiny of business, and the litigious leanings of today’s society, the
focus on corporate social responsible is arguably greater now than it has been since its
origins in the 1970s. The issue has certainly gained importance and visibility within the past
five years. Public relations professionals need to understand their role in order to contribute,
participate and potentially help shape the future of business through corporate social
responsibility. This study seeks to test and examine existing theories within the framework of
a professional working in a socially responsible company.
Specifically, it will examine how public relations is practiced in a socially responsible
organization through a case study of a senior public relations manager during the
development and implementation of a community relations program. The subject of the study
is the director of corporate communications at Benjamin Moore & Co., a leading
manufacturer of architectural coatings. As a member of the National Paint and Coatings
Association, Benjamin Moore chose to follow the operating guidelines put forth in the
8
industry’s code of responsibility, Coatings Care®. To fulfill requirements outlined in the code,
Benjamin Moore held an open house at its manufacturing facility in Mesquite, Texas. The
planning, preparation, and execution of this event provided a unique opportunity to study
how a senior public relations manager enacts certain roles. The method of analysis included
participant-observation, interviews, and a review of related documents. The basic
proposition is that the public relations manager involved in a corporate social responsibility
initiative will exhibit characteristics of “excellence” as defined by Grunig, Grunig, and
Dozier (2002).
The following chapter provides a review of literature on public relations models of
practice and public relations roles, as well as literature on the convergence of the public
relations and corporate social responsibility agendas. Chapter 3 outlines the case study
method, Chapter 4 assesses the case study results, and Chapter 5 presents the conclusions of
this research.
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Public relations and corporate social responsibility are separate, independent fields of
study each comprising its own theories, models, and processes. While each originated and
evolved separately, they share some common principles. This chapter reviews literature to
provide insight into the role of public relations in corporate social responsibility to determine
its influence and opportunities. The first part provides an overview of public relations
literature related to models of practice and practitioner roles. This will provide a foundation
of knowledge regarding the function of public relations and the role that public relations
professionals can play in an organization. The second part of this chapter introduces key
concepts of corporate social responsibility and explores further the convergence of the
corporate social responsibility and public relations agendas.
Public Relations: Models of Practice and Organizational Roles
To understand how public relations may be practiced differently in a socially responsible
corporation, one must first understand how public relations is generally practiced in
organizations. This study finds its theoretical foundation in two important areas of public
relations research: models of public relations practice and public relations roles. Drawing on
10
organizational and communication theory, these interdependent areas of research help to
describe and legitimize the profession and practice of public relations.
Public Relations Models
Grunig and Hunt’s (1984) four models of public relations describe the ways public
relations has historically been practiced within the framework of communication theory. The
four models are: press agentry, public information, two-way asymmetric and two-way
symmetric.
One-way communication refers to messages that flow in one direction—source, message,
and receiver. Two of the models, press agentry and public information, are both one-way
communication models. The differences between the two are found by examining the
manner in which the communication is delivered. Press agentry is likened to propaganda
while public information is generally favorable, yet accurate, balanced and fair—in the
tradition of true journalism. In both one-way models, the purpose of the communication is
generally persuasive and the public relations practitioner disseminating the information
serves as an advocate for the organization. While public relations may employ one-way
communication tactics on occasion, public relations scholars generally agree that one-way
models alone are insufficient for guiding public relations practice. According to the
Managers Guide to Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management (Dozier,
Grunig, & Grunig, 1995), one of the three critical factors in achieving communication
excellence is the knowledge of two-way communication practices.
Two-way communication includes feedback to complete the communication loop from
source to receiver and back to source. Grunig and Hunt divide two-way communication
11
practices into two categories: two-way asymmetric and two-way symmetric. The two-way
asymmetric model involves gathering data from target publics and using the information to
control the communications environment and effect change in public perceptions, attitudes,
or behaviors. Even though gathering inputs from outside the organization is part of this
model, the information gathered is not used to change senior management’s thinking,
behavior, or position about a particular policy or issue. Instead, the “excellence” handbook
shows that, “two-way asymmetrical communication can help organizations persuade publics
to think and behave as the organization desires.” Communication within this model is
viewed as inherently persuasive and manipulative.
Criticisms of this model include Grunig and White (1992), who argued that “the
asymmetrical worldview steers public relations practitioners toward actions that are unethical,
socially irresponsible, and ineffective” (p. 40). Dozier and Ehling (1992) used theories on
mass communication effects (domino effect, agenda setting, uses and gratifications) to
further prove the ineffectiveness of the asymmetrical model. Ultimately, they reject the
notion that public relations “is essentially manipulative” (p. 176) and advocate symmetrical
communication practices that involve conflict resolution and negotiation—rather than
persuasion and media effects.
Public relations professionals using two-way symmetric communication act as a channel
through which the public can communicate with and have influence on organizational
decision-making. The theory suggests that the function of two-way symmetrical
communication is negotiation and compromise with the public relations professional playing
the role of mediator. The purpose of the communication according to this model is
developing ‘win-win’ solutions to conflicts between organizations and publics.
12
Many researchers equate the two-way symmetrical communication model with ethical public
relations practice. It has been positioned as a way for public relations to contribute value to
the organization it represents and to society by helping the organization fulfill a “moral
obligation to balance the interests of an organization with the interests of publics with which
it interacts in society” (J. Grunig, 2000, p. 306).
However, purists like Martinson (1994) contend that, “one genuinely concerned about
building understanding and negotiating conflicts must, by definition, reject self-interest, even
the enlightened variety, as an ethical baseline” (p. 107). Truly symmetrical communication
has been criticized as an unrealistic “utopian” idea for two reasons. The first reason is that
public relations professionals have an allegiance to the organization, their employers, and
must act in the organization’s best interests, which may make it difficult to serve the publics’
interests or behave ethically. The second reason is that corporations are believed to be
powerful, and in many cases are more powerful than their publics. This raises questions
about whether or not it’s possible to achieve true symmetry between organizations and
publics, and what ethical framework best supports public relations practices.
Murphy (1991) filled a gap in the literature by introducing the “mixed-motives” model
based on game theory. It provides a more accurate picture of how two-way symmetrical
public relations is practiced in the real world. The logic is as follows: In a competitive zero-
sum game there is a clear winner and a clear loser. This win-lose scenario is likened to
persuasive public relations that manipulates the public so that the corporation’s needs are met
at the expense of the public good. In contrast, games of pure cooperation involve equal
participants seeking a mutually agreeable outcome – in other words “symmetry.” However,
Murphy argues that total congruency can also lead to inefficient outcomes, in other words, a
13
lose-lose situation. The mixed-motive model exists between these two extremes: “Each side
retains a strong sense of its own interests, yet each is motivated to cooperate in a limited
fashion in order to attain at least some resolution of conflict” (p. 125).
In response to criticism and as a deepening of the theory of excellence, Larissa Grunig,
James Grunig, and David Dozier (2002) asserted in their most recent book that
We never have defined the symmetrical model as the accommodation of a public’s interest at the expense of the organization’s self-interest. In fact, the concept of symmetry directly implies a balance of the organization’s and the public’s interest. Total accommodation of the public’s interest would be as asymmetrical as unbridled advocacy of the organization’s interests. (p. 314)
Instead, they assert that public relations creates opportunities for the organization and its
publics to engage in a dialogue. As the facilitator of that discussion, the public relations
practitioner’s activities would include making an argument or advocating on behalf of the
organization, as well as listening to the concerns and interests of publics, with openness to
the fact that the organization may be in the wrong. According to the excellence researchers
Symmetrical public relations occurs in situations where groups come together to protect and enhance their self-interest. Argumentation, debate, and persuasion take place. But dialogue, listening, understanding, and relationship building also happen because they are more effective in resolving conflict than are one-way attempts at compliance gaining. (Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier, 2002, p. 321)
The above provides a thorough description of the functions and activities involved in two-
way symmetrical communications (argumentation, debate, dialogue, listening, relationship
building), as well as the purpose of those activities (to resolve conflict). The researchers
further contend that the theory of excellence is not purely a normative model that describes
how public relations should be practiced. It is also a positive theory describing how public
relations is practiced in some organizations.
14
In the original conceptualization of excellence, Dozier, Grunig, and Grunig (1995) point to
three spheres of influence that make it possible for public relations to follow the two-way
symmetrical model—knowledge base, shared expectations and organizational culture. The
first sphere, knowledge base, relates to whether the individuals responsible for public
relations in the organization have the professional expertise to manage an excellent public
relations/communication program. According to Dozier, Grunig, and Grunig (1995), “The
knowledge that distinguishes excellent from less-than-excellent communication programs
involves two-way communication.”
The second sphere of communication excellence, shared expectations, relates to roles
theory. The researchers categorized the ability to play the manager role as one of the core
competencies of the knowledge base—they did not specify that public relations needed to
have a specific place on the organizational chart. Regardless of title, however, they found
that a strong relationship between the communication department and management was
essential for excellent public relations to occur. “In organizations with excellent
communication programs, dominant coalitions1 value communicators for their input before
decisions are made” (p. 14). Empirical research by Plowman (2005) showed that knowledge
of and experience in public relations as a two-way practice encompassing mixed motives is
essential if public relations is to be included in the dominant coalition, although it does not
guarantee public relations’ place at the management table. Plowman ultimately concluded
that while knowledge is critical, the worldview of the dominant coalition dictates whether or
not public relations is practiced in the two-way symmetric model.
1 The phrase dominant coalitions comes from management science and organizational theory, identifying that
group of people with the power to set directions and affect structure in organizations. (from Dozier, Grunig, & Grunig, 1995)
15
It’s clear from the above that roles and role relationships help define what model of
practice is followed. The theory of excellence also takes into account the roles public
relations practitioners play within organizations – the role of the public relations function as
well as the individual activities that constitute the role. The following is a review of roles
research in public relations and a discussion of how roles relates to models of practice.
Public Relations Roles
The concept of roles is rooted in structural-functionalist theory and refers both to the acts
performed by people in certain positions within an organization as well as their relationships
with people in other roles (Bivins, 1989). Research on the role of public relations is well
developed and has a long history. In a review of roles research in public relations, Dozier
(1992) proposed that “practitioner roles are key to understanding the function of public
relations and organizational communication” (p. 328).
Broom and Smith (1979) originally conceptualized the following four practitioner roles in
public relations:
(1) expert prescriber—an informed practitioner who dispenses advice to management
who passively follows the directions
(2) communication facilitator—a “go-between” or liaison who manages information
flow between management and its publics
(3) problem-solving facilitator—practitioner who involve management in a
systematic process to solve communication problems
(4) communication technician—a skilled service provider who provides
communication asked for by management
16
Dozier (1983) later rearticulated the activities of public relations practitioners as two basic
organizational roles: the communication manager and the communication technician
Although conceptual differences can be drawn of expert prescription, problem-solving process facilitation, and communication facilitation, these activities commonly are performed interchangeably by the same practitioner, as part of a common underlying role [the communication manager]. (p. 331)
Empirical studies examining public relations models and practitioner roles showed that the
manager role correlates most closely with the two-way symmetric and asymmetric models of
public relations (Dozier, 1983). These findings are consistent with the theory of excellence,
which proposes that having the knowledge to play the manager role is a critical factor in
achieving excellence (Dozier, Grunig, & Grunig, 1995).
The knowledge or expertise needed to play the manager role was further defined through
an in-depth continuation of study on public relations excellence. Grunig, Grunig, and Dozier
(2002) reevaluated role enactment taking into account three perspectives: participants’ self-
reported key areas of expertise or knowledge, participants’ self-reported most frequent
activities, and the dominant coalition’s self-reported expectations of public relations
managers. From these data, four new role variations were developed: manager, senior
advisor, media relations, internal technician (see Table 1).
17
Table 1:
Activities of four distinct roles of communication managers
Manager - expert at solving public relations
problems - responsible for public relations
program success/failure - accountable for public relations
program - makes communication policy
decisions
Media relations - uses journalistic skills to find
newsworthy material - keeps others informed of media
coverage - maintains media contacts - responsible for placing news releases
Senior advisor - provides senior counsel to top
decision makers - creates opportunities for management
to hear publics - represents organization at events and
meetings - suggests public relations policy (but
does not make decisions)
Internal technician - edits others’ writing for grammar and
spelling - writes communication materials - produces brochures, pamphlets, and
other materials - develops photos and graphics for
materials
18
Looking more closely at the expertise needed to enact roles, the researchers were surprised
to find that technician role expertise correlated strongly with many characteristics of
excellence. They concluded that both technical expertise and managerial expertise are
necessary for public relations excellence. For example, “media relations is one of the things
that top communicators do in their role as managers” (p. 235). This supports earlier findings
by Leichty and Springston (1996) who demonstrated that public relations practitioners
perform multiple roles simultaneously. Expanding on Broom and Smith’s findings using
factor and cluster analysis, they found that most professionals are involved in technical
activities while simultaneously engaged in activities more closely aligned with the manager
role.
Two distinct types of manager role enactment also emerged from the 2002 excellence
study: administrative manager and strategic manager. The administrative manager is skilled
in developing goals, objectives, and strategies as well as managing budgets and people. The
strategic manager is skilled at conducting evaluation research, performing environmental
scanning, and using research to segment publics. The knowledge and expertise to enact the
strategic manager role would appear to be the nexus between roles and the two-way models
of public relations practice
Whereas administrative expertise involves the day-to-day operations of a well-run department (regardless of the four public relations models used), strategic expertise is closely tied to a set of strategic tools a communication department needs to use the two-way models (both symmetrical and asymmetrical) and contribute to the organization’s strategic planning process. (p. 228)
The final list of manager role enactment activities according to the excellence study
includes the following: provides senior counsel to top decision makers, makes
communication policy decisions, is accountable for public relations program, is responsible
19
for public relations program success/failure, is expert at solving public relations problems,
keeps others informed of media coverage, creates opportunities for management to hear
publics, and represents organization at events and meetings. In addition to describing the
function of public relations in helping an organization interact with its environment, these
role descriptions provide guidance also on the necessary role relationships between public
relations professionals and others inside the organization – particularly management. Most
public relations roles research focuses on the relationship between the public relations
professional and management as an indicator of the role that public relations ultimately plays
within the organization. These findings create a partial picture of an excellent public
relations professional’s skill set and regular activities.
Connecting Public Relations Roles and Models
There is a noticeable gap however when trying to link roles to communication models.
The excellence researchers state, in order to be excellent, a public relations professional must
enact the manager role and apply two-way communication models. The studies conclude
that the empirically derived manager role enactment “involves facilitating communication
between publics and the dominant coalition, as well as facilitating problem solving” (p.
237)—activities closely related to the two-way symmetrical communications model.
However, these activities are not specifically addressed in the description of the manager role
derived from the 2002 study. Rather, this type of behavior appears to be implied, at most, by
more limited activities, such as “creates opportunities for management to hear publics” and
“represents organization at events and meetings.” It would appear that a better description of
20
the role and function of a public relations professional applying the two-way symmetric
communication model is needed.
One reason for this gap may be that roles research does not sufficiently address the
purpose of public relations, as suggested by Bivins (1989) who stated that “role and function
do not necessarily imply purpose. Purpose, however, may determine role and function” (p.
67). The purpose of the communication according to the two-way symmetric model is
developing ‘win-win’ solutions to conflicts between organizations and publics. Research
suggests that the professional would act as a channel through which the public can
communicate with and have influence on organizational decision-making. Public relations
would also serve as negotiator and mediator between the organization and its publics. This
line of inquiry highlights the close correlation between the public relations function and
“boundary spanning,” which describes how an organization interacts with its environment
(Jemison, 1984).
Leichty and Springston (1996) stated “a boundary spanner interacts with people outside his
or her own group . . . . and conveys information and influence between one’s primary group
and outside groups” (p. 468). They also pointed out that the literature separates boundary
spanning activities into two separate types of interactions. One, whereby the practitioner
represents the views of management to stakeholders, is similar to Bivin’s (1989) description
of public relations professional as “advocate” for the organization. The other, whereby the
practitioner informs management of the perceptions, expectations, and ideas of publics, is
similar to Bivin’s description of the public relations professional as “counselor” to the
organization. Boundary spanning research offers a concise description of the likely activities
of a professional applying the two-way symmetric communication model. It further helps to
21
clarify that the role of the public relations professional is inextricably linked to the purpose of
the communication with its various publics, both internal and external. It suggests that to
implement a two-way symmetrical model of communications, the professional must be
prepared and qualified to wear more than one hat. However, as discussed, research has
shown that none of these activities can be performed unless the dominant coalition has a
shared understanding of the purpose of public relations and an expectation that public
relations will function in this way.
Therefore a more complete definition of the role of public relations may be a professional
who, with support and permission of the dominant coalition, functions as a strategic
counselor, engaging in a variety of boundary spanning activities that facilitate two-way
communications between an organization and its publics, and who is motivated by a desire to
serve the best interests of the organization and the interests of its publics, with a goal of
achieving symmetry, or mutually agreeable outcomes.
Building on this foundation of research, the following section includes a review of
literature that explores the convergence of corporate social responsibility and public relations
and offers insight into public relations opportunities and influence.
Public Relations and Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities And Influence
The public relations literature contains several examples of exploration into the connection
between corporate social responsibility and public relations. Some researchers are motivated
by the desire to find “ways in which the American public relations practitioner may
contribute to the development of a better society” (Wright, 1976). Others focus on how
involvement in corporate social responsibility can help public relations achieve more
22
credibility in organizations (Judd, 1989). Most studies focus on how the public relations
function can apply unique skills to help further the corporate social responsibility agenda and
support a company’s corporate social responsibility efforts. The following introduces key
corporate social responsibility concepts and reviews literature focused on identifying and
understanding the opportunities for public relations practitioners to participate in and
influence corporate social responsibility.
Corporate Social Responsibility Origins and Key Concepts
In spite of more than 30 years of research, a clear and widely accepted definition of
corporate social responsibility is difficult to come by. Some researchers have found it more
effective to define what makes a company “irresponsible” than responsible (Hicks, Wan, &
Pfau, 1999). The idea of corporate social responsibility first appeared around the turn of the
century and fully developed during the 1960s and 1970s. The impetus for corporate social
responsibility as a concept is believed to be a series of corporate crises during the 1960s and
1970s that gave rise to the consumer and ecology movements and subsequent legislation
regulating worker health and safety, product safety, and pollution. It was in this climate of
social activism that “Corporate social responsibility, or lack thereof, became not just an
interesting if arcane topic of study, but a subject of vital interest to corporate survival and
managerial survival” (Wood, 1991b, p. 383). By applying the basic premise that business
and society are inextricably linked, the corporate social responsibility discussion shifted in
the 1980s from the idea that corporations should be responsible to how businesses behave
and respond in relation to social issues (Clark, 2000).
23
Previous studies on corporate social responsibility, social issues management, and social
responsiveness were combined by Wood (1991b) into one model of corporate social
performance. The corporate social performance model offers a framework of three key
principles, three processes, and three outcomes (see Table 2). The second part of the model,
processes of corporate social responsiveness, allow for principles of social responsibility to
be acted out. Clark (2000) highlighted the three processes as the unifying factor between
corporate social responsibility and public relations by comparing them to Cutlip and Center’s
four-step management process. Wood’s three processes of social responsiveness are (1)
environmental assessment, (2) stakeholder management, and (3) issues management. These
provide a useful framework within which to explore public relations’ opportunities and
influence within corporate social responsibility.
24
Table 2:
Wood’s Corporate Social Performance Model
Principles of corporate social responsibility − Institutional principle: legitimacy − Organizational principle: public responsibility − Individual principle: managerial discretion
Processes of corporate social responsiveness − Environmental assessment − Stakeholder management − Issues management
Outcomes of corporate behavior − Social impacts − Social programs − Social policies
25
Environmental Assessment
In the corporate social performance model, environmental assessment refers to the
“information component of responsiveness” – where organizations gain knowledge about the
environment through environmental scanning and analysis in order to respond or adapt to it.
Many public relations scholars have explored public relations’ contribution and role related
to environmental assessment. For some, technology holds promise for helping companies
assess the environment more effectively (Badaracco, 1998) such as by using the Internet to
monitor public opinion and gather feedback from key publics. However, Esrock and Leichty
(1998) found that corporate Web sites are more often used to build a positive corporate
image by communicating the company's good deeds rather than collecting information about
the environment. They concluded, "when used to disseminate information about a
corporation's good citizenship activities, the medium [World Wide Web] becomes the
embodiment of an image building approach to social responsibility" (p. 11).
Environmental scanning has been identified as one of three ways that public relations can
influence corporate social responsibility. Heath and Ryan (1989) proposed that public
relations should be involved in monitoring various publics to develop codes of corporate
conduct based on their particular interests. They also hypothesized five possible ways public
relations practitioners can impact the development of behavioral codes in organizations –
three of which relate to the benefits of environmental scanning: “make companies aware of
prevailing ethical standards,” “help companies refine their concepts of social responsibility,”
“help officials develop codes of behavior that apply community standards to planning and
operating decisions” (p. 23-24). The findings were mixed related to monitoring key publics
and making companies aware of prevailing ethical standards. All respondents indicated that
26
data collection techniques were useful, such as public opinion surveys, external focus groups,
internal focus groups, and networking with industry professionals. However, respondents
who indicated the most involvement in setting corporate social responsibility policy or
organizational codes of conduct were oriented to internal publics more than external. Also
the practice of monitoring was not found to be universal to all respondents. The researchers
held strongly to the notion, however, that “Boundary spanners can play a vital role in
achieving the consensus needed to help a corporation understand when company activities
are triggering an external response that must be given attention” (Heath & Ryan, 1989, p. 35).
Clark (2000) views environmental scanning as a public relations function – it is the
foundation of her “communication management approach.” Pointing to the organization’s
need to conduct analysis of stakeholder needs and wants, Clark claims that public relations
adds value by being able to provide a thorough record and analysis of the previous
communication and interactions between the organization and those stakeholders on any
given issue. It is the combination of a stakeholder analysis (presumably not conducted by
public relations) and the communication analysis (which is conducted by public relations)
that make up the first two steps of Clark’s approach. By involving public relations in the
analysis process, the organization combines “the knowledge of identifying stakeholder
groups and a corporation’s responsibility to them with the ability to strengthen those
relationships through effective communication” (p. 373).
Environmental scanning is also described as “value attuned public relations” (in Black &
Härtel, 2004, referring to Swanson, 1999). Value attuned public relations refers to the
organization’s ability to “detect and transmit information to guide executive decision-
making” (p. 130) and was identified as a key capability of socially responsive organizations.
27
Researchers found that while it is a necessary capability of a responsive organization, it is not
necessarily a factor for differentiating between responsive and non-responsive organizations.
This suggests that all organizations participate in some form of environmental assessment—
it’s how the information is used that determines the level of responsiveness.
In Wood’s model, the information is used to manage relationships with stakeholders,
which is the second process in her corporate social performance model.
Stakeholder Management
One of the central themes in corporate social responsibility research involves the term
“stakeholder,” which originated in Freeman’s 1984 book, Strategic Management: A
Stakeholder Approach. Stakeholders are groups who affect and/or are affected by the
company and its activities, either directly—such as employees, customers, shareholders,
communities, investors, and local and national regulators—or indirectly—including suppliers,
employees' families, nongovernmental organizations (BSR, 2003). Stakeholder management
is based on the principle that business is accountable to society and must take into account
the needs and interests of stakeholders (Heath, 1997). According to Wood (1991b):
A great deal of social issues management research can be classified as dealing with the processes by which corporations understand and assess their stakeholder environments, manage their stakeholder relations, deal with stakeholder demands and expectations and try to improve their own positions of power and influence within stakeholder networks. (p. 392)
Stakeholder management is at the very core of corporate social responsibility. It has been
said that corporate social responsibility “arises in the day to day interactions in relationships
between firms and their stakeholders” (Black & Härtel, 2003, p. 140). And yet, the role and
importance of communication in managing stakeholder relationships is not well defined.
28
Clark (2000) claims this connection represents an opportunity for public relations: “It seems
obvious that communication is at the very heart of managing relationships, yet corporate
social responsibility research largely overlooks this fundamental aspect” (p. 371).
For example, research on sustainable development, a branch of corporate social
responsibility research, shows that in order to be sustainable, an organization must be able to
effectively negotiate, collaborate, and reach compromises with stakeholder groups (Simanis,
2000; Standish, 1998). It is not clear, however, where within the organization the skill to
conduct these communications activities would come from. Similarly, dialogue was found to
be a critical differentiating capability of a socially responsive organization. Dialogue has
been defined as the “conscious and respectful effort to share power in a discourse” (Black &
Härtel, p. 130), and yet it remains unclear which department within the organization is
responsible for leading the dialogue on behalf of the organization. One may assume that, in
many cases, the negotiation and dialogue takes place without the benefit of assistance from
skilled communicators.
However, empirical research by L’Etang (1996) led her to the conclude that “corporate
social responsibility is often managed by public relations practitioners for public relations
ends and therefore corporate social responsibility is seen as part of the public relations
portfolio” (p. 113). L’Etang and others have criticized communication from the position that
organizations are so much more powerful than their stakeholders. Organizations, in a sense,
control the terms of the dialogue so that ultimately the communication is a persuasive act
while it may not appear to be (Cheney & Vibbert, 1987). Apparently, persuasion, can be
intended, as with communications designed to manipulate (as in the press agentry or two-way
asymmetrical communications models), or implied, as with a dialogue in an imbalance of
29
power. It’s unclear whether persuasion, in either form, has a role in stakeholder management.
Because stakeholder management is about relationships, some would argue that true
“communication—not persuasion—is the platform on which relationships are built” (Duncan
and Moriarty, 1998, p. 2).
Most agree that communication is central to relationship management, this is clearly an
opportunity for public relations. The role of public relations in helping to manage this
process depends largely on the professional’s ability to negotiate, collaborate, reach comprise
and facilitate dialogue—and not the ability to persuade. However, the role changes when
organizations are faced with specific issues, as addressed in Wood’s third process, issues
management.
Issues Management
In any relationship, issues arise that need to be managed. “Issues are focal points in public
discourse that never get ‘solved’ in the sense of absolute termination of discussion, but they
do become ‘resolved’ or ‘managed’” (Cheney & Vibbert, 1987, p. 175). Issues management
relates to Heath and Ryan’s (1989) thinking that one role of public relations in corporate
social responsibility is to “help executives avoid crises that can cause serious damage.” A
crisis has been defined by Richard C. Hyde, Executive Vice President and leader of Hill &
Knowlton’s crisis communications practice, as “a problem that gets out of control, is harmful,
threatens the reputation of the organization, or a brand, and takes an inordinate amount of
executive time” (personal communication, October 11, 2005). Public relations is often called
on to assist management in dealing with crises once they have developed. But an arguably
30
more important role for public relations, according to Kitto (1998), is to “serve as an early
warning system to the organization” and head off threatening situations (p. 4).
The period before the crisis is the realm of issues management. Kitto (1989) contends that
public concerns over corporate ethics and social performance create a climate where issues
management is essential. Managing issues includes “responding to public concerns in an
effective organized manner” (p. 1). This includes informing the public about corporate
actions related to satisfying public interests. Social reporting gained importance when
congress enacted the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 requiring
environmental compliance reporting (White, 1999). According to White, “This milestone
legislation, which was inspired in large measure by the Bhopal tragedy, fundamentally
redefined the reporting landscape” (p. 5). Numerous accountability standards and reporting
initiatives have been established in the past decade such as the Global Reporting Initiative
(GRI) in 1997; AccountAbility in 1999; and the United Nations Global Compact in 2000
(BSR, 2003).
Because public relations has intimate knowledge of what’s happening inside and outside
the organization, it is uniquely positioned to help identify issues. Because of its role in
organizational communication, it can also be involved with social reporting. Often, if public
relations is not connected to the dominant coalition, practitioners are not involved until the
situation is elevated to crisis-level proportions. Then public relations is called upon to use
further monitoring and communications skills to effectively respond. Kitto (1989) contends
that the first step in an effective issues management program is establishing a “social
philosophy of management that places the interests of people first in all matters pertaining to
the conduct of the organization” (p. 3).
31
In issues management, when an organization faces a potential conflict with stakeholders,
communication takes on a more critical role in the eyes of management. In contrast to day-
to-day stakeholder management, the need for public relations increases. Continuous
monitoring of issues and involvement in social reporting are ways that public relations
professionals can help detect and manage issues before they become crises. However,
management expectations of public relations in issues management focus on using
communication skills to influence stakeholders’ perceptions. Ultimately, the role of public
relations depends on management’s perceptions of what constitutes effective
communications and what public relations can contribute.
Implications for Public Relations
The common theme of the corporate social responsibility and public relations literature is
relationships. Two types of relationships are critical—public relations’ relationship to
management and public relations’ ability to manage relationships with stakeholders.
Like Kitto (1989) above, Wood (1991a) points to findings by Miles (1987) that show
responsiveness is dependent on external affairs strategy and design, but those are dependent
on top management philosophy. Just as in the discussion of public relations models and roles,
there is an important link between public relations’ ability to influence corporate social
responsibility and the expectations of the dominant coalition. Public relations professionals
cannot affect the behavior of organizations without the full support and cooperation of
management. Heath and Ryan (1989) concluded that “the impetus for codes of corporate
behavior typically comes from the highest corporate officials, and not from public affairs
practitioners” (p. 34). While Wright’s study attempted to explore ways public relations could
32
affect social responsibility, the results show that social responsibility is inextricably tied to
the organizational culture as determined by top management. Wright’s multi-step theory of
social responsibility in public relations proposed that where public relations enjoys high
respect from management, a low degree of supervision, an active decision making role, and
full professional status, the degree of social responsibility will be high.
Heath and Ryan also hypothesized that public relations could help refine concepts of
responsibility by helping develop codes of behavior that apply community standards to
planning and operating decisions. However, only 54 out of 82 respondents were somewhat
to very involved in creating codes of conduct. Judd (1989) found that those practitioners
who frequently recommended socially responsible actions also participated in policy
decisions more frequently. Those participating in management decisions were more likely to
recommend actions that put the needs and interests of society ahead of their employer or
client company. In comparison with Wright’s theory of social responsibility, Judd stated, “if
participation in policy decisions is an indicator of the credibility of public relations with
management, then the results could be interpreted as a link between public relations
credibility and social responsibility” (p. 38).
Based on these findings, there appears to be a “chicken and egg” dilemma—public
relations’ ability to influence management affects to what degree public relations can
influence corporate social responsibility. And yet, involvement in corporate social
responsibility may help public relations gain greater influence with management. Either way,
the relationship with management is critical, which directly relates to Grunig’s contention
that public relations should play a management role in organizations in order for public
relations to be “excellent.”
33
It’s clear that being “responsive” involves multiple communications activities designed to
build, sustain or enhance relationships with stakeholders. First through environmental
scanning, the organization learns about the perceptions and needs of its stakeholders and
other factors affecting its environment presumably indirectly through research. Second, the
organization interacts with stakeholders directly, through continuous interaction or dialogue
where stakeholders and organizations share information on topics of mutual interest.
Activities include one-way communication as well as negotiation, collaboration, and
compromise. Third, issues management arises through a combination of scanning, and
dialogue, when issues are identified that require special attention. From there, activities such
as communication, negotiation, and collaboration are equally important, but ultimately
management must make a change in policy or procedures in order to resolve the issue.
Wood (1991a) agrees that, “The three facets of responsiveness are theoretically and
pragmatically interlocked. Stakeholders are involved in issues, issues involve stakeholders
and their interests; and information about the environment is necessary for responses to be
made” (p. 706). By replacing the word “stakeholder” with “public,” it’s easy to see the
striking resemblance to Wood’s responsiveness model and Grunig’s two-way symmetrical
communications model. In spite of the fact that corporate social responsibility literature
largely overlooks public relations’ role in corporate social responsibility, others have shown
that public relations and corporate social responsibility have similar objectives and that
public relations can contribute greatly to meeting those objectives.
34
Research Questions
The above review of literature highlights the validity of Grunig’s (2002) findings that “we
can describe excellent public relations in its simplest expression, therefore, as strategic,
symmetrical communication management” (p. 306). Given the correlation between research
on the excellence theory and public relations’ role in corporate social responsibility as shown
above, the basic premise of this study is that public relations in a socially responsible
organization will exhibit characteristics of “excellence” as defined by Grunig, Grunig, and
Dozier (2002). Through a case study of a corporate public relations manager, two key
theories from the “excellence” study will be tested:
RQ1: What is the role of public relations in a socially responsible company?
Supporting questions include:
(a) What behaviors characterize the relationship between public relations and
management?
(b) What knowledge, skill sets, or behaviors helped establish that relationship?
RQ2: What model of practice best defines public relations in a socially responsible
company?
Supporting questions include:
(a) What activities characterize two-way symmetrical and mixed-motives
communication practices?
(b) What types of knowledge, skill sets, or behaviors does the public relations
professional contribute?
This study expands these theories by providing a more practical description of how public
relations plays this role.
CHAPTER III
METHODS
To address these questions, a case study employing the method of participant observation
was used. Existing roles research and the excellence studies have utilized quantitative
methods extensively. Qualitative methods also have been used, but to a lesser degree.
Earlier studies suggest that public relations can play a managerial role, employing
symmetrical communication. Therefore, it was decided that a more significant contribution
to this research at this juncture would be to understand the complex process of how the public
relations professional enacts the manager role and implements symmetrical communication
to support a company’s corporate social responsibility goals.
Sampling Strategy
This case study collected data using participant observation methods and analyzed the data
with ethnographic content analysis (Altheide, 1996). A case study is appropriate for many
reasons. First, it offers a window on the actual behaviors and relationships of public relations
and others involved in an organization’s corporate social responsibility efforts—as
opposed to the company’s stated position on the subject. Qualitative methods are useful for
research on informal and unstructured linkages and processes in organizations and on real, as
opposed to stated, organizational goals (Marshall & Rossman, 1999). It is also appropriate
36
for “studying processes, relationships among people and events, the organization of people
and events” (Jorgensen, 1989, p. 12).
Second, developing a more complete picture of the conditions and drivers that help or
hinder public relations in a socially responsible organization represents a new application and
extension of the “excellence” theory into the field of corporate social responsibility. Yin
(2003) argued that case studies should be used to “expand and generalize theories (analytic
generalization) and not to enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization)” (p. 8). Likewise,
Altheide (1996) recommended the use of ethnographic content analysis for data analysis “to
check and supplement as well as supplant prior theoretical claims” (p. 17).
Third, the case provides an opportunity to observe a public relations professional in action
within the organizational environment. Marshall and Rossman (1999) state that “human
actions are significantly influenced by the setting in which they occur; thus one should study
that behavior in real-life situations” (p. 57). A benefit of case study research is that “it seeks
to capture people as they experience their natural, everyday circumstances,” which means, “it
can offer a researcher empirical and theoretical gains in understanding larger social
complexes of actors, actions and motives” (Orum, Feagin, & Sjoberg, 1991, p. 8).
Studying a single case is also appropriate in this case. The use of single case studies has a
long history in social psychology where the ability to understand complex behaviors is
paramount, which makes it an appropriate method for identifying and explaining behaviors
of a public relations professional in a socially responsible organization. Yin (2003) found
that one case is sufficient if it is a critical case—a single case that meets all the conditions for
testing the theory. This case was chosen based on the company’s record of social
responsibility and the public relations manager’s involvement in those efforts, as discussed in
37
detail later in this chapter. Opportunity also played a big role in choosing this case. The
company is currently implementing a new community responsibility code by holding open
houses at many of its facilities. This provided a significant window of opportunity to observe
its corporate social responsibility efforts and the involvement of the director of corporate
communications. The researcher had a well-established relationship with the company
having served as public relations consultant for 17 months, which gave her entrée to the
director of corporate communications. Location and the company’s willingness to cooperate
with the investigator were also factors in choosing the subject. Approval for the observation
was granted by the subject and a member of senior management with oversight over the
company’s manufacturing and distribution operations.
Finally, a case study fills a gap in the existing research. A search for “Social
Responsibility of Business” (the accepted Library of Congress subject indexing term) and
“case study” using electronic databases (limits = only peer reviewed and scholarly journals)
revealed that few case studies have been conducted on the role of public relations in social
responsibility – particularly in the United States. Table 3 illustrates the lack of case study
research on the role of public relations in corporate social responsibility.
38
Table 3:
Search for Case Study Research on Public Relations Roles and Corporate Social
Responsibility
Source Total citations
Citations on Public Relations roles and
CSR
Notes
Business Source Premier / EBSCOhost
88 0 Articles retrieved from 1969 to the present were largely international in scope. Topics included specific issues: financial aspects / costs, management / leadership strategies, ethics / corporate governance, measurement / evaluation, philanthropy, environment, information technology, human resources, CSR education, and social reporting techniques. Three titles addressed a subset of public relations – corporate reputation / crisis management – but did not address the public relations organizational role.
Academic Search Premier / EBSCOhost
19 0 Articles fell into similar categories of content as Business Source Premier with many overlapping titles.
General BusinessFile ASAP / Thompson Gale Group
7 0 Topics included environmental marketing, Brent Spar, gambling, environment, investor activism, charitable giving, and an interview with Chairman of Stride Rite.
UMI ProQuest Digital Dissertations
47 0 Topics included corporate governance, service-learning, volunteerism, and religion. The unit of analysis ranged from educational, community, activist and government organizations, to corporations in various industries: oil, manufacturing, mining, financial institutions, auto, cosmetics, media, health care (hospitals, HMOs).
Communication & Mass Media Complete
0 0
TOTAL 161 0
39
Method
The participant observation was conducted at Benjamin Moore’s manufacturing facility in
Mesquite, Texas, on February 1, 2005, March 23, 2005, and April 15, 2005. Continuous
assessment over time is one of the criteria for a single-case design (Kazdin, 1982). The
researcher spent an average of five hours per day at the facility. Because the researcher spent
17 months as a consultant, coordinating the development and preparations for the event and
participated in three previous events at other facilities, she was already familiar with the
project goals, objectives, roles, and responsibilities, so it was possible to begin gathering data
immediately. The person observed was the director of corporate communications.
Choosing from Jorgensen’s participant roles, the researcher had an insider role. The
researcher had a well-established, ongoing relationship with the director of corporate
communications having served the company as a communications consultant for nearly two
years prior to this event. In fact, the researcher had participated as a consultant in three
similar company events. Her presence was expected, encouraged, and appreciated by the
director of corporate communications and others. This afforded sufficient access to the
facility and proximity to the director of corporate communications’ activities, which were the
focus of the study. In contrast to previous events, the researcher was not compensated for
participating in this event. Her customary event management responsibilities and duties were
reassigned to others so that she could observe and take notes.
Reactions to the researcher were minimal. The researcher was familiar to all those
involved in coordinating the event due to her involvement in several previous events. Some
employees demonstrated interest in the research and offered encouragement. Most seemed to
take no notice, rather, the presence of the researcher was expected and considered normal.
40
Prior experiences with the company made it possible for the researcher to be treated as “part
of the team.” At times, the director of corporate communications seemed aware and
somewhat uncomfortable being observed—especially when the researcher was seen making
notes in the journal. The subject’s primary concern seemed to be whether the researcher was
able to gather the information needed. The subject seemed most comfortable when
conversations slipped back into the customary roles of consultant-client. To minimize this
disruption, the researcher tended to make mental observations and stepped away to record
them. To protect confidentiality, no names were used in the notes or the analysis, and the
director of communications was assigned a pseudonym.
The researcher’s prior experiences with the company had been positive for the most part.
Traveling to three other facilities provided the opportunity to observe the people,
personalities, and culture of the organization. Developing the materials for the open house
event knowledgeable about the company’s operations, policies, and procedures. Through
this involvement, the researcher developed a great deal of respect and admiration for the
company and its director of corporate communications. At the same time, close proximity to
the day-to-day operation also revealed the company’s weaknesses and challenges. Having
seen both “the good, the bad, and the ugly,” the researcher was able to enter the observation
period with a fairly clear and balanced view of the company and its director of corporate
communications.
Juggling the roles of researcher and consultant was a challenge. In the two years working
together, however, the subject and researcher had developed mutual respect for each other as
professionals, rather than simply as client and consultant. The researcher spent a great deal
of time before the observation period explaining the purpose of the study and research
41
procedures. Because the subject was supportive of the research process and comfortable with
being studied, the researcher felt she had sufficient buy-in from the subject to proceed
without fear of jeopardizing the client-consultant relationship. Participating in the event
without being compensated was also a critical factor to distinguish this experience from
previous events and allow for an honest, objective assessment. Further, the researcher waited
several weeks before analyzing the data gathered from the observation. Coming back to the
notes with a fresh perspective helped achieve greater objectivity in the analysis.
“Making notes, keeping records, and creating data files are among the most important
aspects of participant observation” (Jorgensen, 1989, p. 96). A formal journal was the
primary note taking method. To facilitate note-taking, the journal created for the observation
had two columns – a checklist of questions from the protocol (see below) and space for
comments and analysis (see Appendix). Each entry included a date and time. The notes
included the director of corporate communications’ actions, activities, speeches, and casual
conversations. Also recorded were the roles and responsibilities of the people with whom
she interacted, the general subject nature of the conversation, her mannerisms, and tone of
voice. Direct casual conversations between the researcher and the subject helped to amplify
and clarify the observations. Notes were taken at the facility and more details were added
after the observation period.
Jorgensen (1989) said that participant observation can include other strategies in addition
to mere observation. Yin (2003) also encouraged case study researchers to draw on multiple
sources of evidence. During the study, the researcher collected documents, such as
memoranda and email correspondence as well as communications materials used, including
press releases, guest lists, information panels, fact sheets, training handouts, and invitations.
42
Background materials on the company including the corporate Web site and past media
coverage were collected and referenced to a lesser extent.
Following the observation period, two additional interviews with the director of corporate
communications were conducted on August 24, 2005 and on September 28, 2005.
Additional information and insights were gathered on the subject’s background, expertise,
values, and opinions--information difficult to ascertain through observation. The interviews
also provided a self-report of the subject’s perceived role within the organization and her
approach to public relations to compare and contrast with the findings gathered through
observation.
Data Analysis
The data were analyzed using Altheide’s (1996) method of ethnographic content analysis.
The approach permits the researcher to investigate using as a protocol “a list of questions,
items, categories, or variables that guide data collection” (p. 26). This was a logical choice
given the many theories that exist on public relations roles, models, and corporate social
responsibility. Instead of “starting over,” the researcher chose to look for the variables others
have suggested would be present. This highly reflexive and interactive approach also is
useful for discovering “emergent patterns, emphases and themes” and to “help delineate
patterns of human action” (p. 13). In the spirit of qualitative inquiry, the method allows for
new ideas to emerge while helping to verify existing ideas. Altheide (1996) said that
“categories and variables initially guide the study, but others are allowed and expected to
emerge throughout the study” (p. 16).
43
The protocol for this study contained three broad categories, each comprising specific
questions based on Grunig, Grunig, and Dozier’s (2002) study of excellent public relations
and Wood’s (1991b) model of corporate social performance.
The first category, roles, comprised specific questions related to the enactment of the
manager role based on the findings of Grunig, Grunig, and Dozier (2002):
1. Does the subject provide senior counsel to top decision makers?
2. Does the subject make communication policy decisions?
3. Is the subject responsible for public relations programs?
4. Is the subject accountable for public relations program success/failure?
5. Is the subject expert at solving public relations problems?
6. Does the subject keep others informed of media coverage?
7. Does the subject create opportunities for management to hear publics?
8. Does the subject represent organization at events and meetings?
The second category, models, contained questions grounded in the concept of two-way
symmetrical and mixed-motives communication models:
9. Does the subject exhibit values that reflect a moral obligation to balance the interests
of an organization with the interests of publics with which it interacts in society?
10. Does the subject value negotiation and compromise, and seek ways to develop ‘win-
win’ solutions for conflicts between the corporation and its publics?
11. Does the subject exhibit strong skills in mediation and interpersonal communication?
12. Does the subject use a research-based approach to communications planning?
44
13. Does the subject use words like listening, responding, collaborating, sharing
intelligence, openness, dialogue, to describe their approach to communicating with
publics?
The third category, social responsiveness, comprised a single question derived from
Wood’s (1991b) processes of corporate social responsiveness:
14. Does the subject engage in activities that support the organization’s ability to conduct
environmental scanning, stakeholder management, or issues management?
This protocol was incorporated into the format of the participant observation journal as
described above.
Following Altheide’s (1996) recommended data analysis process, the documents and notes
collected were subjected to extensive reading, sorting, and searching. All of the notes were
then compiled into two primary source documents: (1) the journal, a comprehensive
chronological narrative derived from the compilation of observation notes, documents and
informal conversations; and (2) the interview, compiled from notes from direct question and
answer sessions with the subject. Each of these were reviewed extensively and further sorted
by category, with an eye for identifying any additional categories, key words, or topics not
covered in the protocol. Next, the data were compared within categories. Finally a summary
was prepared for each category supported by examples and quotes where appropriate. This
separation of “the data and examples from more general conclusions on which they are
based” highlights one of the benefits of Altheide’s approach (p. 44).
To provide context for the analysis, the rest of this chapter offers background on Benjamin
Moore & Co., the director of corporate communications, and the community responsibility
day events.
45
Case Study
Benjamin Moore & Co. is a leading manufacturer of architectural coatings with a history
of being socially responsible, particularly in relation to manufacturing practices and products.
For example, the company has been proactive in helping the paint industry develop and
implement codes of responsibility. Benjamin Moore’s director of corporate communications
has been with the company for 10 years. During her tenure, she has developed and
implemented significant social programs for the company, including “Community
Responsibility Days”—the centerpiece of this case. Benjamin Moore was chosen for this
study because it is well known as socially responsible which made it possible to study the
role of public relations in corporate social responsibility.
The following provides an overview of company policies and practices, a detailed
description of the recently implemented community outreach program, and additional
background on the director of corporate communications. This overview is based on a
review of materials including corporate web sites, company materials, and media coverage—
the company materials were gathered during the course of the participant observation. The
Web content and media coverage was collected independently after the observation period.
Benjamin Moore & Co.
Benjamin Moore Paints was founded in 1883, in Brooklyn, New York by Benjamin Moore
and his brother. It was acquired by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway company in 2001.
The company employs more than 2,500 employees in the United States and Canada. All of
its paints and coatings are manufactured in seven manufacturing plants (Montreal, Quebec;
Burlington, Ontario; Mesquite, Texas; Milford, Massachusetts; Pell City, Alabama;
46
Johnstown, New York; Newark, New Jersey). The company headquarters and research and
development facilities are in Montvale and Flanders, New Jersey, respectively. Products are
distributed via 16 distribution centers, which utilize both contracted and company-owned
trucks. Benjamin Moore products are sold exclusively through a network of more than 4,000
independently owned paint and decorating retailers throughout North America. Benjamin
Moore is well known throughout the industry as a socially proactive and responsible
company.
Environmental responsibility
Benjamin Moore’s environmental policy states the company’s commitment to “managing
all phases of its business in a manner which minimizes any adverse effects of its products and
operations on the environment.” The company follows the guidelines set forth by Coatings
Care®, the National Paint & Coatings Association’s environmental, health and safety
management program (see Coatings Care® section below). Practices include state-of-the-art
protection systems in manufacturing facilities such as spill containment and drainage systems,
loading and unloading pads, storm-water containment systems, tank-farm canopies and fire
extinguishing systems for flammable materials. Benjamin Moore conducts annual spill
response drills in partnership with local first responders and its emergency response plan is
filed with local authorities. Beginning in 2003, the company began implementing STOP®
(safety training and observation program). This program requires facility managers to
systematically audit all areas of the facility, detect unsafe conditions or behaviors,
supportively address issues with employees, and reinforce safe behaviors and conditions.
The company has had very few environmental incidents. A Factiva® search for Benjamin
47
Moore (in the headline and lead paragraph for all dates) uncovered only two spills. In 1999,
latex entered the city water system in Richmond, VA, due to a malfunctioning valve. The
valve was quickly replaced and the water quality restored. In 1988, toxic solvents overflowed
a drain pipe due to employee error in Toronto. Fire fighters and provincial environment
ministry officials supervised the clean up and concluded that there was no environmental
damage.
Benjamin Moore’s hazardous and non-hazardous waste disposal decreased dramatically
from 2002 to 2003. Air releases and offsite transfers of SARA 313 chemicals declined as a
result of producing larger batches, decreasing use of solvents, and implementing control
technology including special tank lids and vapor recovery systems. Waste reduction
programs included an employee-conceived system for recycling water used to clean tanks
(called “wash water”). As a result, the company re-uses close to 100% of water and solvents
used in the process. Paper packaging, wooden pallets and tinplated steel paint cans are
recycled. Energy conservation initiatives not yet implemented in every facility include
reducing electricity with motion-sensor lighting fixtures that turn off when there is no
activity in the area.
The company demonstrates its commitment to environmental stewardship through a
proactive and innovative approach to product development. For example, the company
removed lead from paint nearly a decade before the federal requirement, and removed
mercury more than 20 years before the federal requirement. Benjamin Moore has developed
environmentally friendly products such as Pristine® Eco-Spec®, a coating certified by
GREENGUARD Environmental Institute and Green Seal for its low volume of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Green Seal is a non-profit organization devoted to developing
48
environmentally friendly specifications for a number of consumer products. Its specifications
for paint include the absence of certain toxic compounds as well as limiting VOC content,
and performance testing for washability, scrubability and hiding power. Only coatings that
pass its stringent tests are approved for use. Various organizations such as the Department of
Defense, the State of Pennsylvania's Department of Transportation and the Aberdeen Proving
Ground (APG) in Maryland have adopted Green Seal coating specifications for various
coating categories. The APG lists five Benjamin Moore exterior flat product lines with a
VOC content less than 100 g/l. Benjamin Moore’s product innovations also include
Waterborne Satin Impervo®. This water-based enamel is an effective alternative to the
company’s popular solvent-based Satin Impervo® products.
Health and safety
Human dignity is the cornerstone of the company’s values. The values statement further
reads, “We are committed to ensuring a safe and healthy workplace.” Benjamin Moore’s
health and safety policy states in part that “working safely is a condition of employment.”
Practices are further guided by the principle that “all injuries are preventable.” The
company’s safety system includes comprehensive employee training, internal audits, regular
local assessments, and tracking and measurement. Measurement includes reportable injuries
as required by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, as well as incidents,
near misses, and unsafe acts.
Company level safety objectives are tied to goal setting and performance rewards at the
facility and individual levels. The company continually works to reduce employee exposure
to powders and liquids by replacing manual handling procedures with hard piping and
49
valving. To further protect employees, much of the manufacturing process is automated
with equipment such as the can “depalletizer” that eliminates the need for manual loading of
empty cans onto filling lines. Results of the company’s safety system include ongoing
replacement and addition of safety guards on equipment. In fact, Benjamin Moore
employees conceived and submitted a safety guard design for the automated labeling and
bailing machines, which has been adopted universally by the equipment manufacturer.
Continuous evaluation, assessment and improvement is the backbone of the safety plan. A
dedicated team of environmental, health and safety experts manage safety from a corporate
level. An experienced environmental, health and safety representative works in each facility.
Also at each facility, there is a cross-functional employee safety team that meets monthly.
Safety communication takes place through ongoing training, staff meetings, workplace signs,
and posters. Standard operating procedures include formulating coatings with safety in mind,
and exercising care in the selection of ingredients and raw materials.
The company has won numerous awards for outstanding safety over the years from the
National Paint & Coatings Association—awarded on a facility by facility basis. The
company’s recordable injury incidence rate in 2002 dropped to 4.35 as compared to the paint
and coatings industry average of 4.7 (based on occurrence among 100 full-time workers in
one year). The rate increased to 6.24 in 2003 which has resulted in more aggressive safety
evaluation and awareness efforts like STOP® as described above.
Charitable giving
Philanthropy is a tradition at Benjamin Moore & Co. Today, the company donates
approximately $2M in funds to charitable organizations each year. The areas of focus are
50
historic preservation, environmental conservation, pediatric well care, and color and design
education. Charitable giving is focused both nationally and locally. As the national paint
sponsor, Benjamin Moore provides both financial and in-kind support to Ronald McDonald
Houses throughout North America. Funds are also directed to public health education
programs to raise awareness and help protect children from lead poisoning. Recipients
include CLEARCorps and “Lead Free is Best For Me” (see community outreach section
below). The company’s commitment to environmental conservation its demonstrated through
support of organizations like the Audubon Society and The Raptor Trust, a leader in the field
of avian rehabilitation. Additionally, Benjamin Moore has donated funds and property to the
Wildlife Habitat Council, dedicated to sustaining and reclaiming wildlife habitats on
corporate, private, and public lands. Nearly 150 acres of Benjamin Moore land has been
certified by the Wildlife Habitat Council as protected wildlife habitat. On a local level, each
facility has a budget for charitable donations. Recipients vary by community and range from
the fire and police departments, children’s sports teams and school projects, to shelters,
city/county pollution reduction efforts, and historic restoration projects. The company has
helped to restore many national historic landmarks including Gracie Mansion in New York,
and The Mount, Edith Wharton’s Lennox, Massachusetts, home.
Community outreach
Benjamin Moore & Co. demonstrates its commitment to the community through
educational programs such as “Lead Free Is Best For Me.” This multi-city outreach and
awareness program was created in 2000 and continues to be supported by Benjamin Moore.
The program facilitates collaboration between local public health professionals and educators
51
to serve those living in neighborhoods with a high risk and/or incidence of childhood lead
poisoning. Through this program, the company has developed collaborative relationships
with government agencies including local departments of health, state departments for
environmental protection, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Benjamin Moore
also serves on the board of CLEARCorps, a national service organization committed to
protecting children from lead poisoning. Through CLEARCorps’ community-based approach,
Benjamin Moore reaches families and property owners to help them eliminate lead hazards
from their homes, in partnership with community organizations, universities, government
agencies and other industry representatives.
In addition, Benjamin Moore invests in community outreach related to helping people
make decisions about using paint and color in the home. Educational tools for the public
include color cards, color chips, Color Samples® (paint sold in small amounts to enable
testing of a color before committing to a larger order), and the Color Preview®, a software
that allows consumers to “paint” their home virtually before deciding on colors, finishes and
paint types. Benjamin Moore & Co. also produces publications like the annual Color
magazine and the Interior Style and Exterior Style books. These feature examples of paint
and color as employed by top architects and interior designers, as well as tips on application.
The company also provides tips on proper handling, and disposal, of paint. This information
is provided on every can, in the above-mentioned publications, brochures and pamphlets
available at retail stores, and on its website. In partnership with the Product Stewardship
Institute and also with Rutgers Univeristy, Benjamin Moore further supports research and
educational outreach on post-consumer paint recycling.
52
The company’s values highlight the company’s commitment to care for the communities
in which it operates. Facility managers make in-kind and cash donations to the charities of
their choice. Many Benjamin Moore employees volunteer for local charities and civic
organizations. Through its recently implemented “community responsibility day” open house
events, the company invites neighbors and community leaders into the facility to meet
personnel, see the manufacturing operation, and learn about the process of making, selling
and using paint (see community responsibility day section below). The company further
supports local communities through its commitment to independent retailers. As local small
business owners, Benjamin Moore retailers are part of the fabric of the community—serving
residents, contributing to the economy, and providing jobs. Typical Benjamin Moore paint
and decorating retailers have been in business for more than 40 years. Benjamin Moore is
dedicated to the independent store channel—its products cannot be purchased at “big box”
retailers such as Wal-Mart, Lowe’s or Home Depot.
Employee benefits, women’s and minority advancement
The people of Benjamin Moore represent various genders, ethnicities, sexual preferences,
nationalities, regions, socio-economic levels, and languages. In 1997, Benjamin Moore &
Co. received a humanitarian award from the Anti-Defamation League's Paints, Chemicals
and Wallcoverings Industries Division. The senior leadership group and facility operations
management team are both approximately 13% women. The researcher is not aware of any
specific programs designed to promote the advancement of women or minorities. This is an
area where Benjamin Moore & Co. maintains accepted standards but is not exceptional.
53
According to the director of human resources, Benjamin Moore strives “to ensure that our
employee-related programs and practices reflect the fundamental value of respect for the
individual and maximize opportunities for employees to make a difference.” The company’s
code of ethics and human resources policies, as stated in the employee handbook, provides
for a non-discriminatory and harassment-free workplace, with special statements to clarify
certain inappropriate behaviors, with a goal of preventing sexual harassment, substance abuse
and violence in the workplace. The company offers an employee assistance program and a
24-hour confidential help line for reporting breaches of this code. The handbook further
outlines the company’s principles and guidelines for protecting workers. Among others, these
include, equal employment, diversity, workers with disabilities, and an open-door policy.
Benjamin Moore’s benefits package is standard and includes holidays, sick days, paid time
off, plus health and retirement plans. One unique benefit is that the company provides lunch
at no cost to all salaried employees—a tradition begun by the company’s founder. Employees
may also purchase paint at a discount. There are numerous individual examples where the
company has demonstrated caring and generosity to employees, particularly those with health
problems or special family circumstances. In a recent internal company-wide survey, 89% of
respondents reported that Benjamin Moore is an excellent place to work. The average tenure
for employees in manufacturing facilities is 11.8 years.
Disclosure
Benjamin Moore & Co. published its first sustainability report last year. This report does
not follow the Global Reporting Initiative guidelines, but it represents an important step
toward greater transparency. Before 2000, the company published an annual report, however
54
financial reporting now is handled by parent company, Berkshire Hathaway. Benjamin
Moore’s financial information is reported as part of Berkshire’s building products division,
which is a subset of the manufacturing, service, and retail division. Building products
includes Benjamin Moore & Co., ACME building brands, Johns Manville and MiTek. This
division generated $4.3 billion in revenue in 2004. Berkshire Hathaway does not break out
Benjamin Moore & Co.’s financial performance separately.
In addition to the recently implemented “community responsibility days” at facilities (see
community responsibility day section below), the best example of Benjamin Moore’s
openness and transparency is its approach to media relations. The company strives to be a
resource to journalists. It is estimated that the company receives more than 50 inquiries from
reporters each week. Its policy is to respond within 24 hours to any media request. Approved
Benjamin Moore spokespersons are regularly available for interviews or to provide
information on various topics, including paint formulation, production, and application, as
well as environmental issues (lead, volatile organic compounds, etc.). During both of the
spills described in the environmental section above, company executives were available for
comment and fully cooperated with the media and local authorities. In fact, journalists and
other stakeholders in Richmond were invited to witness the replacement of the broken valve.
National Paint & Coatings Association and Coatings Care®
Chemical manufacturing companies like DuPont pioneered many of the environmental
health and safety procedures and processes that have helped to set the standard for codes in
various industries. Paint production is a subset of chemical manufacturing that over the past
55
decade has begun to develop its own set of responsibility codes aligned with Responsible
Care® and ISO 14000, the existing codes for the chemical industry.
Coatings Care® is the paint and coatings industry's health, safety and environmental
program created by the industry, for the industry, by the National Paint & Coatings
Association. It is a globally recognized program designed to assist industry companies in
managing their health, safety, and environmental responsibilities. The program teaches
companies how to effectively integrate these requirements while maintaining profitability.
Participants are acknowledged by governmental and environmental agencies as conscientious,
responsible, and among the top environmental performers in industry.
Coatings Care® is an example of industry self-regulation to help protect worker and
community health, safety, and the environment. The program emphasizes sustainability, safe
selection, handling, use and disposal of chemical components in paint products, as well as
consideration for environmental protection in new product development. The program has
five codes of management practices to direct companies on the health, safety and
environmental aspects in five critical areas: transportation and distribution, product
stewardship, manufacturing management, community responsibility, and security.
Benjamin Moore & Co. played an integral role in the development of Coatings Care®
codes on the health, safety and environmental aspects of product manufacturing and
distribution listed in National Paint & Coatings Association’s Transportation and Distribution
Guide, Product Stewardship Guide, Manufacturing Management (Volumes 1-3) Guide.
When the association completed its fourth code in 2003, the Community Responsibility
Guide, Benjamin Moore’s director of corporate communications partnered with the manager
of environmental health & safety to begin planning implementation. This code focuses on
56
emergency response and alert procedures, employee education and training, and community
being a good community liaison.
Benjamin Moore’s “Community Responsibility Days”
“Community responsibility days” were developed as part of the implementation of the
Coatings Care® community responsibility guide. As a way of increasing the company’s
efforts at transparency and proactive communication with the community, the director of
corporate communications recommended, and it was decided, that Benjamin Moore would
proactively invite the community into its manufacturing facilities so that local residents,
neighboring businesses, and community leaders could learn about the company’s operations
and meet company personnel. In consultation with senior leaders including the general
counsel and vice president of supply chain, it was further decided that the open house would
be by invitation only and take place on Fridays. Managing the guest list helped to ease
management’s concerns about security and liability (no person under 18 would be admitted).
Holding events on Fridays (a slow day for manufacturing) would ensure availability of
operations personnel and minimize business disruption. The objectives of the community
responsibility days were: (1) to fulfill the requirements of the Coatings Care® community
responsibility code, (2) inform the public about the company’s operating procedures, policies
and safety standards, and (3) strengthen the company’s relationships with community
members.
In developing the community responsibility day concept, the director of corporate
communications decided to structure the community event as an “information exchange.”
The information exchange was created and utilized by the Center for Risk Communication, a
57
research and consulting organization, to help chemical companies implement Responsible
Care® guidelines. Responsible Care® is the global performance initiative for the chemical
industry, introduced to the United States in 1988. Research on risk communications defines
a risk as “a real or perceived threat to that which we value” (Covello, 2003, slide 2). Vincent
Covello, director of the Center for Risk Communication, defines risk communication as, “a
science-based approach for communicating effectively in high-concern, high stress,
emotionally charged, or controversial situations” (Covello, 2003, slide 3). While the
community responsibility day event itself represented a low-concern situation, personal
health, safety, and the environment, are typically sources of high concern for most people.
Therefore the principles of risk communication and the information exchange format were
used as a way to enhance the event experience for the public, and promote mutual
understanding between the company and the community.
In a typical public forum, the public sits auditorium-style facing the presenters;
presentations are given, and attendees ask questions by stepping up to a microphone. In a
traditional open house, visitors stop by at their leisure, look around, socialize and depart.
The information exchange combines the educational aspect of a forum with the informality
and interactivity of an open house. At the information exchange, material on selected
subjects or issues was presented at six poster stations arranged in a semi-circle. A person
knowledgeable about each subject (a Benjamin Moore employee from that facility) stood
beside each station to talk with attendees and answer any questions. A table positioned next
to the station held copies of the full content of information presented on the posters, plus any
other relevant handouts, pamphlets, or demonstration materials. For example, Benjamin
Moore distributed brochures provided by the National Paint and Coatings Association and
58
the Environmental Protection Agency on the proper disposal of unused paint and reducing
lead hazards in the home. Sample raw ingredients and finished paint products were also on
display. Participants were free to come and go at their convenience, and self-select the poster
stations that interested them most, rather than listening to a series of presentations that may
or may not have been relevant. In addition, Benjamin Moore & Co. served food and
refreshments, catered locally, and offered tours of the facility so guests could see first-hand
the paint manufacturing process.
Each poster station featured three panels of information formatted so that a person
standing back 20 feet could see the “headline” or key message on that topic in large type. At
10 feet, a person could see more detailed information accompanied by graphs or pictures. If a
guest stepped closer, he or she could discuss the material with the knowledgeable employee
on that subject area. This format promotes relationship building between community
members and company personnel as they interact, share information, and listen to each other.
Benjamin Moore developed six poster stations. The topics included (1) environment, (2)
health and safety, (3) retail, (4) in the public interest (featuring local community involvement
and donations), and (5) what’s in a can of paint. The sixth poster station focused on first
responders. These were developed in partnership with local fire and police departments who
were invited to participate.
The text for each poster station was developed through the process of “message mapping.”
A message map is a means of organizing and delivering detailed or complex information
“within a clear, concise, transparent, and accessible framework” (Covello, 2002, p. 1). The
process involves bringing communicators, subject matter experts and members of
management together to identify stakeholders, anticipate concerns and questions, and
59
prioritize and organize information into a hierarchical structure aligned with stakeholder
needs. Benjamin Moore’s message mapping sessions were facilitated by consultants from
the Center for Risk Communication and Hill & Knowlton. Participants included the director
of corporate communications, and members of the environmental, health, and safety
department. Other department representatives who participated and/or were consulted as
needed included operations, color technology, marketing, retail, and human resources. All
text was reviewed and approved by the legal department.
Benjamin Moore & Co. provided extensive communications training to all personnel
involved in the community responsibility day events. An initial two-day training session was
conducted in March 2004 for the environmental, health, and safety department, and facility
managers. The training session included an overview of risk communication principles and
techniques for delivering information, handling questions, and initiating dialogue. A
significant portion of the session was devoted to the explanation of Coatings Care® and the
community responsibility day initiative. Also, prior to each community responsibility day
event, a half-day training was conducted at each facility for employees who would be
participating, as poster station representatives and tour guides, on community responsibility
day.
In addition to creating the poster stations and conducting training, preparations included
developing a guest list, producing and mailing invitations, and conducting outreach to
encourage attendance. The invitees included the following: employee families; nearby
residents and neighboring businesses; local, state and federal government officials (such as
the mayor, city council, senators, and representatives); community leaders (such as the
chamber of commerce, local civic organizations and clubs, and school principals); regulators
60
(such as the departments of environmental conservation, public health, and transportation, as
well as OSHA); first responders; vendors and suppliers; local Benjamin Moore retailers;
customers (contractors, architects, and designers); and local media outlets.
To date, Benjamin Moore has hosted community responsibility days at five out of seven
manufacturing facilities. Approximately 100 guests attended each event, including the
mayor of each city, state senators, local assemblymen, city council and chamber of
commerce members, vendors and suppliers, independent paint and decorating retailers, and
employee family members. The response from attendees was positive. Several guests
commented that the poster stations were an effective way to share information and learn
more about Benjamin Moore. In some cases, information was further transmitted through
local newspapers reporting on the event. Facility managers reported that the event enhanced
existing relationships with neighbors and community members, and helped them establish
new relationships with key stakeholders. Employees also exhibited an increased sense of
pride. The success of the event was measured by the number of attendees and anecdotal
examples of improved relationships and positive feedback. No formal assessment of the
program has been conducted to date.
Benjamin Moore’s Director of Corporate Communications
The director of corporate communications was the subject of this study (referred to as
“Haley” through the remainder of this document). In this position, Haley was responsible for
all internal and external communications for the company (excluding advertising). Included
are public, government and media relations, issue and crisis management, and web site
content oversight. Figure 1 shows the various aspects of public relations managed in this role,
61
as drawn by Haley. (Public relations, by Haley’s definition, means traditional public affairs
and media relations, while many other aspects of public relations she refers to as corporate
communications.). The position reports to the chief operating officer. Haley has served in
this role for more than 10 years. Haley’s background includes many years experience as a
vice president in a mid-size, independent public relations firm, prior to which, she spent time
as public relations manager in a Fortune 100 company. Haley received a BA from Hunter
College, New York, New York, and an MBA from Stern School of Business at New York
University.
The next chapter presents the results of the participant observation.
62
Figure 1:
Director of corporate communications responsibilities
External Communications
Internal Communications
Crisis Communication
Training
OrganizationalEmployee
Communication
Intranet
Issue Management
(Lead)(VOCs,
air quality)(Contamination,
spills)
GovernmentRe lations
Crisis Management
Communication
Community Relations& Community Responsibility PR
Corporate Communications
MediaRelations
Website
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This chapter outlines the findings according to the three categories delineated in the
research protocol—roles, models, and social responsiveness. It also includes a summary of
additional themes that emerged during the course of the study. These findings are based on
the results of participant observation over three days, as well as interviews with the subject,
the director of corporate communications.
Roles
1. Does the subject provide senior counsel to top decision makers?
When the community responsibility code from Coatings Care® was introduced, company
executives turned to Haley for counsel on implementation. Community relations
traditionally had been a communications area of responsibility. She conceived and
recommended the community responsibility day approach. She negotiated with senior
leaders such as the chief executive officer, vice president of supply chain, and general
counsel to gain consensus, approval and support for the initiative and for her recommended
approach. Haley maintained the role of liaison with senior management throughout the
process. For example, she provided updates on planning, results, and timing, and invited
them to attend.
64
Haley treated the members of the operations department and environmental, health and
safety department as equal partners, offering her counsel, and asking for their counsel on
specific details, such as which employees would be involved, where to place the poster
stations, and what route to use during the tour. However, in all aspects of planning,
preparation, and implementation, Haley took the lead and others generally deferred to her
opinions. For example, on the first visit to Mesquite, she noticed while walking through the
facility that the paint on an outdoor metal structure called a pipe bridge had begun cracking
and peeling. She deemed this to be an eyesore to the community and suggested that it be
repainted. When the facility manager took issue with the cost for repair, Haley took
ownership and used her relationships with other departments to fund the project. A solution
was reached when members of the marketing team decided to photograph the repainting
using Benjamin Moore products and use the before and after shots in promotional materials.
On the same trip, Haley noticed a sign in front of the facility displayed an old version of the
logo—a misrepresentation of the Benjamin Moore brand. Similarly, she took ownership for
approaching the vice president of supply chain about allocating funds to replace the sign.
However, in this case, the cost was prohibitive.
Haley reported in interviews that she spends 50% to 60% of her time “setting strategy and
doing business consulting for the company.” She serves as in-house counsel to her
colleagues within the organization, to help them plan and set communications strategy for
various initiatives. In the past, she developed communication plans for her colleagues. Now,
she helps them get started, then reviews their plans, provides input, meets with them, offers
ideas, and shares her expertise, insight and knowledge of the people (or publics) concerned.
65
Haley believes there are two kinds of counsel—solicited and unsolicited. For example,
she reports that people from all over the organization solicit her advice when planning a
program that explicitly involves communication. These may include specific outreach
programs to retailers, or consumer marketing campaigns. Sometimes when counsel is
solicited, she remains involved in creating the final solution and through implementation.
Other times, she is simply part of the initial dialogue to help the project team explore options.
Unsolicited counsel comes into play when the project team overlooks or undervalues the role
of communication, or determines that communication is not important to the success of the
project. In this situation, if Haley believes the decision or initiative will in some way affect
the brand, she reaches out to the team (or team member) in a non-confrontational manner, to
provide concepts or ideas, and facilitate a dialogue around communications issues related to
the project. In some cases, she will offer her opinion to the chief executive officer directly.
She explained this by saying, “I tell management what I believe the public needs or wants
from Benjamin Moore.” Haley maintains that the respect and trust of her colleagues
developed over the years makes it possible for her to offer counsel in this way.
2. Does the subject make communication policy decisions?
The areas where Haley appears to have complete autonomy include charitable giving,
media relations, crisis communications planning and preparedness, and community relations.
She provided final approval on every aspect of the community responsibility days including
poster station text, graphics, and design, the guest list, invitation design, food and
refreshments served, the overall set up for the event (traffic flow, entrances, and exits),
placement of poster stations and food tent, tour route and script, the employees chosen to
66
stand at each poster station, and areas of the facility that needed to be spruced up before the
event. She helped the facility manager resolve issues such as how to keep the filling line
running while so many employees were occupied at poster stations; how to ensure that
finished product would be removed from the loading area in time for the event; and how best
to inform guests about the nearby distribution center. Haley made the decision to increase
donations to the local fire department. She also made a special trip to Mesquite to view an
historic house site and agreed for the company to sponsor the restoration of one of the rooms
in the house.
Haley maintains that while she makes decisions related to corporate communications, the
chief operating officer and chief executive officer have the power to “veto” her decisions.
When it comes to areas of the business not directly related to communications, Haley
provides recommendations and counsel but does not have final approval. These include
general business strategy, marketing strategy, advertising, product development, government
affairs, retailer relations, and employee relations. Her involvement increases when decisions
will affect the company’s brand or reputation.
3. Is the subject responsible for public relations programs?
Ultimately, the responsibility for the community responsibility day was shared among
several departments. The event served many purposes and was not purely a public relations
exercise. Even though the departments of communications, operations, and environmental,
health and safety shared responsibility, it was clear that everyone perceived Haley to be in
charge. On the day of the event, anyone who had a question related to preparation and
implementation directed it to her—particularly questions that required a judgment call, such
67
as how best to manage certain guests or fulfill a special request. Logistical questions were
also directed to the environmental, health, and safety project manager working with her. The
vice president of supply chain asked Haley questions related to the success of the event—
how many people attended and if particular guests had arrived. They also discussed ideas for
how to make sure all participants felt involved.
Throughout the planning process, employees appeared to defer to Haley’s judgment for
three reasons:
(1) out of respect for her knowledge and expertise—as evidenced by her ability to
answer questions or make recommendations using real life examples from her own
experience or observation;
(2) out of respect for her position as director of corporate communications and a
member of the senior leadership group—as evidenced by employee attitudes (polite,
courteous, and respectful); and
(3) because of her personality—Haley is very passionate and asserts her opinion
strongly on topics she considers important. People, men especially, tended to “back
off” when they sensed that she was firm in her position.
Haley reported in interviews that taking responsibility for the success or failure of the
organization’s communication or public relations program was one of her top three
responsibilities (see Table 4). In preparing for the community responsibility days, she
exhibited all the characteristics of someone who felt responsible, as did the manager of the
facility. Members of the environmental, health, and safety department appeared less
concerned with the details. Haley personally invested a great deal of time, energy, and
resources to the project. She devoted more than six days of her time to personally visit the
68
facility and meet with the employees there. She allocated funds from her communications
budget to cover the costs of the training, community outreach, and gift bags (the remaining
costs were absorbed by the facility and the environmental, health, and safety department). In
addition, she utilized her relationships with consultants and vendors who provided services
needed during implementation. This level of investment may be related to Haley’s belief that
her job “is to protect the brand” and “look out for the company’s best interests.” Opening the
facility to the public in this way was an opportunity to make an impression on the
attendees—it could result in a positive, negative, or neutral perception. Haley wanted to
ensure that the event reinforced a positive image of the brand and enhanced the company’s
reputation.
4. Is the subject accountable for public relations program success/failure?
Overall, accountability was difficult to judge because there was no formal mechanism for
measuring the program’s success or failure. Benjamin Moore personnel regarded it a success.
It probably would have been easier to determine who was accountable if there had been a
problem, by virtue of seeing where blame was placed. Employees involved verbally credited
Haley for the success of the program by thanking her for her involvement and guidance. The
facility manager took care to thank everyone who had contributed. Almost all company
personnel involved were willing to offer suggestions for improvement or “up-grades” to the
program. All the employees demonstrated great care and concern for how the public views
Benjamin Moore—they wanted to make a positive impression. And they viewed Haley as
the person who would help them do that. Haley reported in interviews that she has a proven
track record at the company and a reputation for getting things done.
69
As stated above, the vice president of supply chain was interested in the success of the
event as measured by how many people attended and if particular community leaders
attended. When asked if the community responsibility days were worth doing, he referred to
an earlier event at another facility to make a point about the benefits. Previously, that facility
received complaints from nearby residents about the noise from the delivery trucks that
sometimes arrive late at night or early in the morning for loading. After the event, to which
many of these neighbors attended, there were no further complaints. He seemed to believe
that company and the neighbors had developed a mutual understanding and a greater sense of
trust. He offered his suggestions and opinions directly to Haley. It was unclear whether this
was because he believed her to be accountable, or, because he knew she was the person who
could “get things done.”
5. Is the subject expert at solving public relations problems?
Haley often used story-telling to demonstrate her expertise. At the employee training, in
her opening remarks, she told the story of the spill at Colonial Heights, Virginia, to explain
the benefits of conducting annual crisis communications preparedness and training, a process
she implemented upon joining the company. In 1998, a valve failed and latex was released
into the city water system near Richmond. (NB: This facility is now closed.) She described
how quickly the situation unfolded and how well the company responded due to being
prepared. Within an hour someone from the city water works was at the door because of
numerous calls from local businesses asking why the water coming out of the tap was white.
Haley was called. She tapped a local sales employee as spokesperson on the ground until an
official company spokesperson arrived from headquarters while the facility manager focused
70
on fixing the valve. Haley stayed at headquarters and served as command central along with
the director of operations. Richmond television stations featured the incident on all the
evening news programs for two days. Immediate action steps included shutting down the
system and replacing the valve. Communication action steps included working with the
director of public health to get the word out that latex was a benign substance, unless
consumed in very large quantities. Haley invited the media to witness and video the new
valve being installed. She also took out a full page advertisement in the local newspaper to
apologize to the community for the inconvenience and thank them for their patience. This is
a good example of crisis or issues management, one of Haley’s responsibilities.
Another example of expertise Haley described in interviews was the communication plan
template. She developed this template—a series of strategic questions—to help lead
colleagues through the communications planning process. Questions include, what is the
situation or problem to be solved, what are your communications goals/objectives, what are
your messages (she advocates three key messages for clarity based on the principles of risk
communication), who are the audiences you want to reach, what types of “media” (channels,
vehicles) should be used to reach them, and how will you measure success. The template is
just one of the ways that Haley facilitates strategic communications planning and encourages
effective communication practices within the organization.
As mentioned in the counseling section, Haley’s general communications expertise was
evidenced by her role in managing the event planning process, materials development, and
communications training for employees.
71
6. Does the subject keep others informed of media coverage?
During the observation period, the local newspaper printed two articles on Benjamin
Moore—one before and one after the event. The first reported on the donation to help restore
a local historic house. The second reported on the event itself. In both cases the facility
manager spotted the stories first and sent them to Haley. She then disseminated them to
members of senior management with a note to provide context. On an ongoing basis, a
member of the communications team sends out daily electronic reports received from the
clipping service. Articles of significance are usually forwarded to leaders directly by Haley
with a note to explain their significance.
7. Does the subject create opportunities for management to hear publics?
In interviews, Haley rated herself as making an average contribution in this area. More
often, instead of creating opportunities for management to hear publics directly, Haley serves
as the liaison between the public and management. “I tell management what the public
needs/wants from Benjamin Moore,” she explained.
However, by creating the community responsibility day event, she also provided a
significant opportunity for management to hear publics. Members of management present at
the event included the vice president of supply chain, general counsel, director of operations,
director of color technology, and director of environmental, health, and safety, as well as the
managers of the Mesquite manufacturing and distribution facilities. All of these
representatives could be seen throughout the day talking with various community members
including the mayor of Mesquite, an assistant city manager, a representative from the state
senator’s office, members of the city council, employees’ spouses and parents, as well as
72
representatives from the school district, the local Head Start, social services, and a reporter
from The Mesquite Daily News. Both facility managers remarked that they established
important contacts with people they did not know. Company executives shared information
about the company’s operations, lead awareness efforts, and other projects. But they also
listened to the guests talk about their projects and priorities. Haley was active throughout the
day greeting guests and introducing them to company executives.
8. Does the subject represent organization at events and meetings?
In addition to introducing executives to community members, Haley interacted extensively
with all the guests during the community responsibility day. She played the host both for day
and for the employee training held prior to the event. She paid particular attention to the
representatives from the local fire and police departments.
In interviews, Haley reported making an above average contribution to activities such as
representing the organization at events and meetings. She indicated that she spends a great
deal of time building relationships with people outside the organization, both formally and
informally. Her formal connections include serving on the board of directors for
CLEARCorps, the Alpha Workshops (a design/arts training organization that supports
artisans afflicted with AIDS), and Publicolor (a youth training and counseling organization
that brings color and skills to NYC public high school students). She is a member of the
advisory council for the Audubon Society’s Constitution Marsh Sanctuary and a chair holder
for the Color Marketing Group, the global color forecast organization. Haley also
represented Benjamin Moore & Co. at a recent summit of public health educators as part of
the “Lead Free is Best for Me” program. Informally, she responds to the numerous calls and
73
requests that come to her office from the media and other stakeholders, which she estimates
is around 50 inquiries per week. Most media opportunities go to other approved company
spokespersons. She herself gives about two media interviews a week.
Haley was observed contributing to all the areas of manager role enactment. The areas
where she seemed to contribute most significantly included providing strategic counsel,
making policy decisions, using expertise to solve communications problems, providing
opportunities for management to hear publics, and representing the organization at
events/meetings. There was less evidence during the observation to support being
responsible and held accountable for public relations programs, and keeping others informed
of media coverage. However Haley’s contribution to these role activities were confirmed in
interviews. The next section describes findings related to the next set of questions on models
of public relations practice.
74
Table 4:
Subject assessment of contribution to specific role enactment activities
Significant contribution • I take responsibility for the success or failure of my organization’s communication or public relations program
• I am senior counsel to top decision makers when communication or public relations issues are involved
• I use my journalistic skills to figure out what the media will consider newsworthy about our organization
Above average contribution
• I represent the organization at events and meetings • I maintain media contacts for my organization • I make communication policy decisions • I keep others in the organization informed of what the
media report about organization and important issues • I edit or rewrite for grammar and spelling the materials
written by others in the organization • Because of my experience and training, others consider
me the organization’s expert in solving communication or public relations problems
Average contribution • I create opportunities for management to hear the views
of various internal and external publics • I observe that others in the organization hold me
accountable for the success or failure of communication or public relations programs
Below average contribution
• I produce brochures, pamphlets, and other publications • I am the person who writes communication materials • I do photography and graphics for communication or
public relations materials • I am responsible for placing news releases
No contribution • Although I don’t make policy decisions, I provide decision makers with suggestions, recommendations, and plans
75
Models
9. Does the subject exhibit values that reflect a moral obligation to balance the interests of
an organization with the interests of publics with which it interacts in society?
Haley refers with great pride to the company values statement, which reads, in part, “we
value human dignity above all else.” In her opening remarks at the employee training she
said, “This company has a long history of doing the right thing, all the time, unequivocally.”
She also used the outcome of the Colonial Heights latex spill to underscore that all the
facilities have great relations with the communities in which they are located. She
maintained that by hosting the community responsibility day, Benjamin Moore was
acknowledging the public’s right to know what was going on inside the walls of the facility,
and allowing them decide for themselves whether the plant posed any threat to themselves,
their community, or the environment. What Haley wanted to accomplish in educating their
neighbors was a mutual understanding about the benefits and risks associated with the
manufacturing process. Most of all, she wanted the community to know that human health
and safety is the company’s number one priority.
Haley demonstrated her strong desire to meet the needs of publics by taking action over
the areas where she had the most control. For example, she insisted the fire and police
departments be invited to participate in the event. It was devised as a win-win solution: the
departments would benefit from the opportunity to promote their activities to the public,
while Benjamin Moore would benefit from having the community see the partnership that
existed between the facility and first responders. To make sure the departments got
something out of it; Haley approved an additional financial contribution to each service. In
addition, the facility manager mentioned that a local historic preservation organization
76
recently called asking for support for a new restoration project. Haley made a special trip to
visit the site and agreed to sponsor the restoration. As a result, the organization sponsoring
the restoration was able to fund another part of the project. Representatives attended the
event and expressed their appreciation to Benjamin Moore. All of this attention to meeting
the needs of stakeholders helped enhance Benjamin Moore’s image in the eyes of the
Mesquite community. In interviews Haley stressed, “You have to care enough about the
brand/corporate reputation to take the time and understand that responding to people is
what’s important.”
10. Does the subject value negotiation and compromise, and seek ways to develop ‘win-win’
solutions for conflicts between the corporation and its publics?
The researcher did not witness any active conflicts between the organization and its
publics during the observation period. Examples of past conflicts that Haley shared include
the spill in Colonial Heights and the public’s general concerns about lead hazards and
volatile organic compounds. Haley reported in interviews that she actively supports internal
initiatives aimed at reformulating products to reduce the use of solvents and other potentially
harmful chemicals. The company appears to be committed to minimizing the use of such
chemicals in the manufacturing process in order to drastically reduce (and possibly eliminate)
any potential risks of adverse effects on employees, neighbors and the environment. When
inquiries are made on these topics, Haley provides information on what the company is doing
to support the needs of people and protect the environment. This information is also posted
on the website. Haley oversees the company’s environmental conservation support
initiatives and the lead awareness programs. The fact that Haley completed a two-day course
77
at the MIT-Harvard public disputes program taught by Lawrence E. Susskind and based on
his 1996 book Dealing with an angry public: The mutual gains approach to resolving
disputes, further demonstrates the value she places on negotiation and compromise.
Her advice on resolving conflicts includes “tell the truth” and “don’t be defensive.” Her
philosophy is that “Most of the time people just want you to listen to what they have to say.
And in the end, if you can’t give them exactly what they want, it’s okay.” To illustrate this
point, she told the story of a paint retailer from the mid-west who left a voicemail that she
received while on vacation. The caller was frustrated and claimed to have been passed
around several times. He requested a tour of a manufacturing plant on an upcoming visit to
New York, for the purpose of convincing him to carry Benjamin Moore paints instead of a
competitor. Haley, who was on vacation, called him back that day saying, “I’m sorry that no
one got back to you. I’d like to help you.” She asked questions to gain understanding and
learned that he had been assigned a sales representative. She suggested a tour of the research
and development facility in Flanders, NJ. She offered to make some additional phone calls
to set things up, set a timeframe for response, and promised that someone would call back to
make arrangements. This resolved the situation and the retailer was satisfied—an example of
the type of relationship building and conflict resolution activities that take place on a daily
basis.
11. Does the subject exhibit strong skills in mediation and interpersonal communication?
Each time Haley arrived at the Mesquite facility, she was greeted warmly by the
employees—many seemed to know her well. She was frequently observed joking and
78
laughing with colleagues and senior managers. People seemed to appreciate her warm,
informal manner, and humor.
Haley led a segment of the training focused on interpersonal communications skills. This
included role-play exercises to increase employee confidence in serving as company
spokesperson. Haley introduced the theme “Embrace – Engage – Enlighten” as a guide.
“Embrace” referred to the way employees would welcome neighbors to the facility and greet
them warmly, as if they were entertaining someone in their own home. “Engage” referred to
how employees were encouraged to initiate conversations with guests by talking about their
role at the facility, what they do on a day to day basis, and how it fits into the overall
production process. “Enlighten” referred to the technique of continuing the conversation by
asking “did you know” and sharing interesting facts about the company. Employees were
equipped with a variety of sample facts to share with guests.
The majority of Haley’s time during the event was spent facilitating conversations between
guests and employees. Haley met nearly every guest personally, greeting them warmly and
thanking them for coming. She asked questions to determine their interests, explained what
there was to see and do, and introduced them to another employee who would be able to
share information relevant to their needs. She seemed particularly interested in making sure
that the police and fire department representatives were happy and went out of her way to
make sure they felt involved. This included driving traffic to the first responder poster station,
making introductions, engaging them in conversation, encouraging them to take breaks to
enjoy lunch and get a tour, and making sure that each one received a gift bag to take home to
their families.
79
12. Does the subject use a research-based approach to communications planning?
The concept of the information exchange that was applied for Benjamin Moore’s
community responsibility days was based on extensive research conducted by the Center for
Risk Communication. However, there was no formal research conducted before or after the
community responsibility day event (such as a survey of the community). The only method
for gauging the public’s perceptions was anecdotal conversations with attendees.
In interviews, Haley rated her contribution to formal, routine and specific research
activities as average. Her contribution to informal information gathering was rated as
significant. Methods included using contacts with knowledgeable people outside the
organization and applying her judgment based on experience. Haley emphasized the
importance of knowledge about public perceptions gained directly through regular
interpersonal communication with various stakeholders, especially journalists. She referred
to herself as a “human temperature gauge” helping the organization to distinguish between
hard and soft news. Throughout the study, Haley exhibited a keen knowledge of current
events and social issues. She indicated that some formal research and competitive
intelligence was provided by the marketing department, as well as feedback gained through
the customer call center.
13. Does the subject use words like listening, responding, collaborating, sharing intelligence,
openness, dialogue, to describe her approach to communicating with publics?
In interviews, Haley frequently talked about the importance of listening, being responsive,
and facilitating dialogue, both internally and externally. “Dialogue” is a word she used often
to describe interactions both externally and internally. She often used the word “respect” as
80
in treating people with respect and described the company’s relationship with the media as
one of “mutual respect.” Respect from senior management was also discussed as something
she had worked to earn. Similarly, “trust” was something she had worked hard to establish
with people both inside and outside the organization. “Facilitate” was used most often to
describe interactions with people inside the organization.
The most important words emphasized were “responsiveness” and “listening.” She said,
“Most of the time people just want you to listen to what they have to say. It takes patience.
You have to be willing to really listen—to care enough about the brand/corporate reputation
to take the time and understand that it’s important (to listen to people).” Haley expressed her
strong belief that every call or request should be answered saying, “I always try to call people
back the same day.” The story of the disgruntled retailer mentioned above is a good example
of this. It illustrates Haley’s approach to communicating with publics, which is “all about
relationships.” Her belief is that every person’s opinion matters, every person deserves a
response, and that listening and making an effort to address a person’s needs helps build
strong relationships. These principles were reinforced during the employee training prior to
the event. In this session, Haley encouraged employees to initiate a “dialogue” with guests.
Her suggestions included sharing information about their job and sharing interesting facts
about the company.
As expected, Haley exhibited much of the knowledge needed to practice the two-way
symmetric model of public relations and mixed motives. Her actions strongly supported her
passion for meeting the needs of people, and putting the needs of people before the needs of
the company. This was also supported in words like “relationships,” “responsiveness,” and
“listening.” Her knowledge and expertise in applying conflict resolution, negotiation,
81
mediation, and interpersonal skills was also evidenced strongly, but more so in interactions
with internal publics rather than external. The next section reviews the findings related to
Wood’s model of corporate social responsiveness.
Social Responsiveness
14. Does the subject engage in activities that support the organization’s ability to conduct
environmental scanning, stakeholder management, or issues management?
While it was clear that Haley sees herself as the steward of the brand and a watchdog, she
did not appear to engage in formal environmental scanning. Her knowledge of public
perceptions and issues was derived from personal relationships with stakeholders and the
media, as well as her own media consumption. Throughout the study, Haley exhibited a keen
knowledge of current events and social issues.
Stakeholder management was an area where Haley played a major role. The responsibility
for managing relationships with key stakeholders appears to be divided throughout the
company. For some, Haley plays a lead role in managing the relationship. For others, she
either shares the responsibility or plays a supporting role. Table 5 shows some of the
stakeholder relationships Haley is involvement in managing and indicates whether she plays
a leading, shared, or supporting role. For the most part, it appears that Haley’s knowledge
and expertise are utilized by several departments when it comes to stakeholder management.
When it comes to managing issues, Haley definitely plays a leading role and takes that role
very seriously. “My job is to protect the brand,” she explained. She sponsors annual crisis
communications training for operations personnel, manages public affairs and government
relations related to environmental and social issues, and spearheads outreach to communities
82
and community-based organizations. Haley is clearly the “go-to” person at the company for
any issues—especially those that involve, or may involve, the media.
The following summarizes the findings related to four additional themes that emerged
strongly during the study.
Additional Themes
Internal negotiation, conflict resolution, and mediation
Haley’s mediation and negotiation skills were most evident when dealing with internal
publics rather than external. She used a variety of strategies to facilitate the process and to
ensure that preparations were carried out according to her desires which resulted in both win-
win solutions and compromises. In all of her interactions, assertiveness, persistence, and
humor proved to be valuable techniques.
In one example, she and the facility manager reached a compromise. On the site visit,
Haley pointed out and requested improvements to the grounds and facility that would
enhance the visit for guests, such as landscaping around the employee’s entrance. When she
arrived for the event and saw it had not been done, she gently chided the facility manager,
and soon convinced him to drive her to a nursery where she chose plants to adorn the
entrance. Haley allocated money from her budget to cover the costs.
83
Table 5:
Communications role in managing stakeholder relationships
Stakeholder Group Relationship Management Role
Others Responsible
Regulators Shared Operations, product development, environmental, health, and safety
First Responders Supporting Facility managers, environmental, health, and safety
Retailers Supporting Retail services, sales, distribution, marketing
Employees Shared Senior management, human resources, facility managers
Media Leading Designated spokespersons in marketing, product development, etc.
Community-based organizations
Leading Facility managers
Designers and Architects Shared Sales, marketing
84
The pipe bridge situation resulted in a win-win. As mentioned above, while standing out
near the loading area, she saw a metal structure connecting the manufacturing and raw
material storage facilities (a pipe bridge) in need of a new coat of paint. She pointed out that
this could be seen from the road and a nearby housing development, and requested that it be
repainted. When the manager balked at the expense, she suggested that they partner with the
marketing group specializing in industrial maintenance coatings. Her idea was to use the
repainting as a photo opportunity to showcase one of the company’s commercial coatings.
She promised to work with the manager to see this through, and it was successful.
Haley also created a win-win solution for the distribution facility manager and employees.
The Mesquite facility used to house both manufacturing and distribution operations but the
distribution operation recently moved to a new building a few miles away. The distribution
manager was very proud of this building but it would be difficult to arrange for the
community responsibility day guests to see both facilities. The manufacturing facility was
chosen as the main site so that guests could see the paint production process (as opposed to
loading palettes of product into trucks which is what takes place at the distribution center).
Haley was very concerned about finding a way to ensure the involvement of the distribution
center employees. She asked that they be allowed to rotate from their jobs for an hour to
come to the event. She also arranged for a special poster to showcase the new distribution
facility. Haley also made a special trip to tour the distribution facility and meet employees
there.
Overall, a wide variety of internal stakeholders came together during the community
responsibility day including personnel from the following:
85
• Departments, environmental, health, and safety, sales, marketing, operations, and
product development,
• Locations, Mesquite, Montvale, Flanders, and Pell City, and
• Levels, senior leadership, facility managers, lower level managers, and hourly
employees.
The community responsibility day made it possible for employees to have an opportunity to
work together and experience something positive. Although others shared responsibility, it
was ultimately Haley who orchestrated the program, facilitated the process, and served as the
hub that held the spokes of the wheel together. This is where Haley’s mediation skills
proved to be essential.
Care and concern for internal publics
From the beginning, Haley was intent on making the experience a positive one for local
facility personnel. To ensure the facility manager had ample support in preparing for the
event, she arranged a visit to Mesquite and meet with him three months before. Also
included were the project manager from environmental, health, and safety, the manager of
the nearby distribution facility, and the local human resources manager. Local marketing and
sales personnel were also involved. Haley wanted all of these people to be involved in the
planning because ultimately they all had a “stake” in the event. She facilitated the meeting.
Haley made a special trip later that day to take a tour of the new distribution facility and
meet the employees there. She spent a lot of time with the two facility managers and local
personnel. She greeted everyone warmly, answered questions, and listened to their concerns
and suggestions, to help ease any anxieties they might have about hosting the event.
86
To further ensure that employees felt comfortable with their role in the event, Haley
arranged for a half-day communications training/orientation for all those participating. Many
were visibly nervous about being involved and some had worked the night shift. Haley broke
the ice by introducing herself and then asking employees to go around the room give their
name, work responsibilities, and number of years with Benjamin Moore. She praised the
group for their loyalty and contributions, noting that there were hundreds of years of
experience in the room. The participants were visibly encouraged by this recognition.
At the community responsibility day event, Haley spent time at each information station
talking to employees—especially when there was a lull in the flow of visitors. She said she
wanted them to be involved and feel appreciated. The way Haley talked to employees
showed that she cared about them. She was personable, and very respectful of each person.
She repeatedly emphasized her appreciation for the contribution they made to the community
responsibility event, and the contribution they make every day as employees.
The importance of media
While media relations was not a focus during the community responsibility day, Haley
emphasized the importance of media frequently in interviews. It was clear that she takes her
media responsibilities very seriously. She reported that using journalistic skills was one of
the top three significant activities in her role as director of corporate communications. She
expressed great respect for the role of the fourth estate in society. “My first responsibility is
to the media,” she explained, “because they have the greatest reach and they often ultimately
shape what the public thinks.” She expressed great pride in the relationships she has
developed with journalists throughout her 15-year career. Longevity and consistency, she
87
believes, are two secrets of her success: “Editors are some of my closest friends. You stay in
touch with people as they move through their careers.” Haley described her approach by
saying,
I never pitch—I’m not selling anything. It’s about relationships. I treat them like human beings. A journalist is just a person trying to do their job. It’s about mutual respect. I know my approach works because they keep coming back. We get 50 press calls a week.
She indicated that maintaining these relationships is critical to her ability to represent the
views of key publics to management. As discussed above, communications conducts very
little formal research on public attitudes and perceptions—“research” consists of direct
conversations with stakeholders. Talking to the media represents a critical link to a variety of
publics.
Different roles/approach depending on purpose
As indicated by the above discussion of media relations and the diagram in Figure 1, Haley
wears many hats and utilizes various types of expertise—including technical expertise. She
reported spending about 20% of her time on implementation, saying “I still edit all the
writing (it’s hard to find good writers).” Haley uses a variety of consultants to the “legwork”
including: Hill & Knowlton for government and public affairs, issues management, crisis
management and crisis communications training; Veder+Perman for consumer public
relations and special events like the HUE awards, a contest honoring the work of top
designers; and the John Smallwood agency for publications like the Color magazine and
Interior/Exterior Style books. Community relations and charitable giving are handled “in-
house” by Haley.
88
When asked to relate her approach to the models of public relations, Haley emphasized the
need to utilize different approaches for different purposes. She suggested tailoring the public
relations approach to the needs of each audience. Persuasion, in her view, has its place in
marketing public relations, where the purpose is to help sell products. Developing mutual
understanding between the organization and its publics best reflects her approach for
community relations and issues management. “It depends on the need of the audience, and
what you’re trying to accomplish,” she explained. For example, when determining what
product to buy, consumers need information related to the strengths of the product – colors
available, application techniques, durability – in order to make a decision. Benjamin Moore’s
consumer public relations efforts are geared to provide that type of information to help them
make the decision.
Summary
The public relations manager in this study was observed making a significant contribution
to most manager role activities. She also demonstrated strong technical skills and the ability
to play multiple roles simultaneously. Activities related to environmental scanning and
stakeholder management were also evident. However, these were enacted through informal
interactions and general media consumption, rather than formal research. The motivation to
balance the needs of the organization with its publics was also clearly evident, and linked to
the subject’s personal values and the company’s values of putting the needs of people first.
This orientation to the needs of people, both internally and externally, was further exhibited
through the application of facilitation, negotiation and conflict resolution skills—however
89
these skills were most often observed “in action” in relation to internal publics, rather than
external.
The following chapter offers a discussion of these findings in light of previous research,
including the limitations of this study and ideas for future research.
90
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
The following is a discussion of what the results of this study contribute to research in this
area, its limitations, possible areas for future study and the researcher’s conclusion.
Role Enactment
In answer to the first research question, what is the role of public relations in a socially
responsible company, the results of this study are closely aligned with the findings of the
excellence researchers (Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier, 2002) with two exceptions.
Generally, as suggested by the literature, Haley played a management role within the
organization, serving as counselor, utilizing both strategic and technical expertise to solve
communication problems. This was evidenced during the implementation of the open house
in the way that Haley developed an approach and strategy to address the Coatings Care®
requirements, and had a strong influence on the planning and implementation, straight
through to completion. She facilitated the process of involving representatives from across
the company together allocated resources event. Senior and middle managers alike
demonstrated respect for her knowledge and expertise, as evidenced by their questions and
reliance on her counsel, and for her position, as evidenced by behaving in a polite, courteous,
and respectful manner. One characteristic that proved to be an asset in playing this role was
91
Haley’s passion and assertiveness. On matters relating to corporate reputation and the
company brand, Haley held firm to her position and argued her case when necessary.
The excellence researchers concluded that both technical expertise and managerial
expertise are necessary for public relations excellence—particularly media relations expertise.
Leichty and Springston (1996) also demonstrated that public relations practitioners perform
multiple roles simultaneously. Haley was a perfect example of this. However, the technical
expertise she exhibited most was in editing materials rather than in “using journalistic skills
to find newsworthy material” or “keeping others informed of media coverage” (Grunig,
Grunig, & Dozier, 2002). Haley carefully reviewed and edited all the materials for the
event—from poster station content and graphics to press releases and handouts for employees.
In this case, media outreach was delegated to a consultant. However, in interviews, Haley
revealed that much of her time is spent handling media relationships directly, as suggested by
the excellence researchers. The difference found in media relations emphasis may be related
to the type of media involved. Haley specializes in national publications including shelter
magazines like House & Garden, and newspapers like The New York Times, that regularly
report on trends and issues that are important to Benjamin Moore. She spends less time
maintaining relationships with media in smaller markets like Mesquite. In addition, media
relations was a low priority for this particular event.
The excellence study also presumed that enacting the manager role would include making
management aware of media coverage. In this study, while Haley was somewhat involved in
informing management of coverage specific to Benjamin Moore, it was her knowledge of
public perceptions on matters of importance to Benjamin Moore as gained from general
media coverage that seemed most valuable. With this insight, she could offer context around
92
any specific news articles. Also in lieu of formal research, Haley favored direct contact with
stakeholders, as when representing the organization on the board of directors at
CLEARCorps, working with the EPA on the “Lead Free is Best for Me” program, and as
observed in her dealings with the first responders and charitable organizations in Mesquite.
The insight gained from ongoing, informal, direct contact with stakeholders appears in this
case to trump the need for formalized research on the views of key publics. In addition, with
the exception of the open house, the usual practice at Benjamin Moore appears to be more in
favor of mediated communication between some stakeholders and management, rather than
creating opportunities for management to hear publics directly. However, based on the
positive reaction of the senior managers involved in the open house, facilitating direct
communication between management and stakeholders may be a potential opportunity for
public relations in this situation.
The following section discusses the findings related to the second research question, what
model of practice best defines public relations in a socially responsible company.
Communication Models
Esrock and Leichty (1998) found that separating out the characteristics of boundary
spanning was important to understanding public relations roles. (Broom and Smith’s (1979)
description of the communication facilitator combines both activities into one role.) The
boundary spanner fulfills the functions of (1) representing the views of management to
stakeholders, and (2) informing management of the perceptions, expectations, and ideas of
stakeholders. This, presumably, takes place as a complete, ongoing feedback loop. The
results of this study support the need to examine the two sides of the loop as separate areas.
93
When it comes to representing management’s views to the public, this study supports
Esrock and Leichty’s (1998) contention that more than one communication model can be
used by the same public relations professional. In some cases, the role of public relations
may be to simply inform stakeholders of some action or change made by the organization in
response to their needs. In other cases, the role of public relations may be to reassert the
company’s position on the matter and try to build understanding, or persuade stakeholders to
the organization’s point of view. This is in line with Cancel, et al.’s (1997) contingency
theory which says that the practice of public relations actually takes place along a continuum
of advocacy to accommodation and that different situational factors determine where on the
continuum a particular action will fall. For example, the strategy employed for the
community responsibility day could be described as a combination of the public information
and two-way asymmetric models. It was public information in the sense that one objective of
the event was to inform and educate the public about Benjamin Moore’s operations in the
community. The event provided attendees with a variety of materials, a tour of the facility,
and the opportunity to talk with people knowledgeable on various subjects. However,
another purpose of the event was to make a positive impression on the public. This was
evidenced by the care and time that went into the development of the messages conveyed,
using the research-based approach provided by the Center for Risk Communication. It’s
possible that some observers would perceive these efforts to control the message as a form of
manipulation. The difference in this case is that the researcher also observed a strong desire
to tell the truth—one of Haley’s basic values that guides her approach to public relations. All
claims in the materials were severely scrutinized by various subject matter experts. Anything
deemed to be more “spin” than fact was removed. It’s true that great care was taken to
94
ensure that the materials cast Benjamin Moore in a positive light and that the information
provided could be clearly understood by the participants, but all the information provided
appeared to be accurate and truthful.
The other side of the boundary spanning model involves informing management of the
public’s views. This study suggests that public relations does play this role. However, it also
showed that some external relationships require the public relations professional to be the
mediator or facilitator of the relationship, while others do not. For example, the facility
managers at Benjamin Moore and members of the environmental, health, and safety team
interact directly with regulators, the sales and marketing teams interact directly with retailers,
and the operations team interacts directly with suppliers. Haley was not needed to “facilitate
opportunities for management to hear publics” in those cases, as the excellence theory would
suggest. She served as a resource or support when needed. Her involvement would increase,
however, when something happens to strain the relationship, such as the latex spill into the
water system at Colonial Heights when she was called in to facilitate. Many publics,
however, do not have direct access to management. For them, the public relations
professional is an essential facilitator. In this study, the director of corporate
communications shared and supported many stakeholder relationships, such as regulators and
consumers, but she was the only link to the company for many community-based and
environmental organizations.
According to the boundary spanning and two-way symmetric models, the purpose of
communication with stakeholders is to gather information. Therefore, the role of public
relations is to listen and understand the needs and interests of stakeholders and transmit
information to management. Black and Härtel (2004) found that all organizations participate
95
in some form of environmental scanning, but how the information is used determines
responsiveness. This can be interpreted as the need to take action based on the information.
When senior management “owns” a stakeholder relationship, the negotiation for mutual
understanding and win-win solutions takes place directly. But when public relations “owns”
the stakeholder relationship and mediates or facilitates between stakeholders and
management, the ability to negotiate with management is critical.
Heath and Ryan (1989) were surprised to find that those public relations professionals
most involved in corporate social responsibility were more oriented to internal publics. This
study shows that the reason may be that convincing management to take action based on the
needs of stakeholders is one of the key roles of public relations in corporate social
responsibility. Management appears to be the toughest stakeholder of all, making negotiation
and conflict resolution skills more important internally than externally. For example, Haley
was very oriented to internal publics. She negotiated with senior leaders such as the chief
executive officer, vice president of supply chain, and general counsel to gain consensus,
approval, and support for the initiative and for her recommended approach. She
demonstrated care and concern for all the employees involved during the process. One of the
outcomes, and perhaps another justification, for spending time and effort on internal publics,
was that the people involved from Benjamin Moore developed a strong appreciation for the
act of opening its doors, interacting with the public, and sharing information with the public.
This is significant because the literature tells us that management philosophy is an important
determinate to corporate social responsibility. Kitto (1988) said that a philosophy of putting
people first is necessary for effective issues management. Judd (1989) corroborated this
finding, suggesting that putting the needs and interests of society ahead of the company was
96
part of the formula for a public relations professional involved in corporate social
responsibility. In this case, Haley’s leadership and involvement in implementing a successful
community responsibility day event seemed to help reinforce the management philosophy
and organizational culture that is necessary for public relations to be involved in corporate
social responsibility in the first place.
Limitations
Obviously, this was a study of one person at one company—the findings are not
generalizable to all companies. The selected company is a small- to mid-size business that
operates exclusively in North America. Therefore, issues related to globalization, a hot topic
in corporate social responsibility research, did not come into play. While providing insight
into the role of public relations in smaller companies, the study does not address challenges
related to the role of public relations in large companies. Due to the size of the company, the
public relations department was also very small—this study does not address challenges of
applying public relations roles and models in a large department where roles are
responsibilities may be carved out and divided over many people. Further, the observations
were limited to a specific set of interactions over a finite period of time. These cannot begin
to capture the wide range of interactions with multiple stakeholders that constitute the
director of communications full breadth of activity. This captured the activities enacted to
implement one project versus the behavior of the director of communications in the everyday
environment. There were several members of the dominant coalition that the researcher did
not have the opportunity to observe, namely the chief operating officer and the chief
executive officer. It is possible that the director of communications’ interactions with these
97
individuals could have different characteristics. A longer period of observation in variety of
settings would provide a more complete picture and possibly show how activities and
approach varies depending on the setting and the people involved.
Areas for Future Research
To clarify and validate the findings of this study, it is recommended that similar studies be
conducted in many more organization—of different sizes and from different industries—to
compare the activities and techniques used by other public relations professionals to the ones
observed here. It would be most beneficial to observe public relations managers in many
more socially responsible companies, and compare them, as well as to compare those results
to observations of public relations managers in “irresponsible” companies. One continuing
challenge to this line of research is establishing reliable criteria to differentiate a responsible
company from an irresponsible one. Another challenge is access; not many people and
companies are willing to be observed in this way.
It would also be useful to explore how this plays out in a larger organization with many
more stakeholder groups, both internally and externally, and determine if there are specific
challenges, techniques, and skills, that influence the role of public relations in corporate
social responsibility. Questions might include the following: How are responsibilities and
activities divided in a larger public relations department? How do public relations managers
ensure that everyone in the department follows the same approach? One persistent challenge
to continued research is the difficulty in accurately and fairly measuring a company’s record
of corporate social responsibility. The absence of a universal standard makes it difficult to
compare “apples to apples.”
98
Another line of potential research would involve examining the willingness of public
relations professionals to participate in corporate social responsibility at all. For example,
how many public relations professionals currently want to be involved in corporate social
responsibility and see this as part of their role? It’s possible that the motivation and approach
differs by industry, by company size, or even by gender. Also, how often are the public
relations professionals expectations aligned with senior management’s expectations? For
those that do want the responsibility, it would be interesting to see how many feel that they
have the right knowledge and skills for the job, and/or what techniques proved useful in
establishing themselves in that role. Finally, for companies that do expect public relations to
play this role, the question is whether human resources understands what skills to look for in
hiring a qualified public relations manager.
Conclusion
This study showed that public relations professionals must be able to enact a manager role,
but technical skills are also extremely important. First, writing and editing is critical for
organizations to construct messages that are, simultaneously, understood by publics, truthful
and accurate, and help to reinforce a positive corporate image. Second, professionals use
their relationships with the media and daily media consumption to provide insight to
management on issues, stakeholders, and the environment—rather than simply make
management aware of media coverage. These represent two variations on the manager role
as described in the theory of excellence (Dozier, Dozier, & Grunig, 2002), and provide
additional clarity on the actual activities and behaviors of public relations professionals in
enacting the manager role.
99
In enacting the manager role, the public relations manager in this case also engaged in a
variety of boundary spanning activities. Various communication models were applied for
different types of communications throughout the boundary spanning process. Essentially,
the model used depended on where the interaction took place along the continuum of two-
way communication between the organization and its publics. Informing, persuading, and
negotiating were all used, depending on the purpose of the communication. This supports
Cancel, et al’s (1997) contingency theory and shows that this line of research may warrant
further study.
In regards to stakeholder management, this study showed that public relations is involved
in stakeholder relationship management and, in this case, was the primary contact for some
stakeholder groups. Clark (2002) suggested that public relations can support organizations in
managing stakeholders, but this study suggests that public relations can be, at least, a full
partner and, in some cases, the leader of stakeholder dialogue for the organization. However,
as implied by Wood (1991), the study also showed that not all stakeholder relationships will
require facilitation by public relations—unless an issue arises.
This case also demonstrated the application of mixed motives (Murphy, 1991). It further
showed that the desire to balance the needs of the organization with its publics sometimes
requires the public relations professional to advocate for publics to management. While
mixed motives (Murphy, 1991), two-way symmetric (Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier, 2002), and
the stakeholder management approach (Freeman, 1984), all emphasize the importance of
conflict resolution, mediation, negotiation skills in dealing with publics/stakeholders, this
study suggests that these skills are critically important in the relationship between public
relations and management—perhaps more than with publics. Further, facilitating
100
collaboration and win-win solutions among internal stakeholders, led to increased
appreciation and support for corporate social responsibility, which proved, in this case, to be
an effective way to influence perceptions of management. This suggests that Plowman’s
(2005) research on conflict resolution and power for public relations may warrant further
study.
The purpose of this study was to explore the role of public relations in a socially
responsible corporation to determine its influence and opportunities. The public relations
manager in this case had knowledge and expertise in effective relationship management skills,
cared deeply about how an organization managed its stakeholder relationships, and how the
health of those relationships affected the company’s reputation. Overall, this case
demonstrated that public relations and corporate social responsibility advocates within the
organization can work together, utilizing a variety of skills, combining action and
communication, to effectively manage the organization’s relationship with, and reputation in,
society.
Like any enterprise change, to be effective, corporate social responsibility has to start at
the top and permeate all aspects of the operation until it becomes part of the fabric of the
organizational culture. Corporate social responsibility cannot exist as an isolated strategy,
someone at the top has to believe in it, see the benefits, and feel passionate that it is “the right
thing to do.” The philosophy of enlightened self-interest (investing in corporate social
responsibility in order to reap benefits such as improved reputation, sales, employee retention,
etc.) is the only way to convince others on the management team to support the
organization’s ability to operate in a socially responsible manner. However, this logic can go
too far. Corporate social responsibility has lost some credibility by the prevalence of
101
publicity campaigns designed to divert attention from irresponsible behavior (e.g. Nike) and
cause marketing campaigns designed to achieve greater market share (e.g., The Body Shop
and Ben & Jerry’s).
Meanwhile, public relations still battles its historical association with military propaganda.
Many business managers still maintain a narrow view of the function as purely persuasive.
That is why it is unrealistic to believe that public relations can function as the leader of
corporate social responsibility, or serve as the organizational social conscience as some have
suggested; the role simply does not carry that level of credibility within most organizations
and many practitioners simply do not wish to play this role. For management to see public
relations as a partner in corporate social responsibility, these perceptions of public relations
must be changed.
Public relations professionals can be advocates for corporate social responsibility within
the organization when this philosophy is supported by top management—as it is at GE. In
particular, public relations can help build an argument for how corporate behavior influences
corporate reputation, and reputation’s impact on so many other aspects of business. Within
this argument, it may be possible to draw links between being a successful business while
being force for good in society. Public relations can build credibility over time by providing
counsel to top management on a one-to-one basis. The more crises an organization
experiences and survives, the more value management places on the public relations
function—they begin to appreciate the vital problem-solving and facilitation skills that public
relations professionals bring to the table.
To be an effective counselor, it is critical for the public relations professional to keep one
foot firmly outside of the organization and focus on the needs and interests of publics. This
102
may be easier in larger organizations where the availability of resources makes it possible for
top communicators to delegate publicity generating activities. The role also seems to come
naturally for the “journalist in residence” style public relations professional who maintains
close personal relationships with the media. Outside public relations counsel also tend to
enjoy greater credibility in the eyes of management, likely due to their “outside” status.
However it is achieved, through formal environmental scanning or through personal
relationships, it is the knowledge and insight of the world outside the organization, coupled
with the desire and ability to advocate for stakeholders and achieve a balance between
organizational and societal interests, are among the greatest contributions to corporate social
responsibility that a public relations professional can make.
103
APPENDIX
Journal Format
DATE TIME ANALYSIS Example of:
Roles Models Social responsiveness
Why?
Social Responsiveness □ Environmental scanning □ Stakeholder management □ Issues management
Two-way Symmetric □ Values - moral obligation to balance the org/public
interests? □ Values - negotiation and compromise, seek ‘win-win’
solutions? □ Strong skills in mediation and interpersonal
communication? □ A research-based approach to planning? □ Use words like listening, responding, collaborating,
sharing intelligence, openness, dialogue, to describe their approach to communicating with publics
Roles □ Manager: □ expert at solving PR problems? □ takes responsibility for PR program success/failure? □ held accountable by others for PR programs? □ makes communication policy decisions? □ senior counselor to top decision makers? □ creates opportunities for management to hear publics? □ represents org at events and meetings? □ Keeps others informed of media coverage? □ Other: □ Use of journalistic skills to find newsworthy material? □ maintain media contacts for the organization? □ responsible for placing news releases? □ edit for grammar/spelling the writing of others? □ write communication materials? □ produce brochures pamphlets/ materials? □ create photos and graphics for PR materials?
104
REFERENCES Alfonso, F. B., & Sharma, P. (2005). Is responsibility on the menu? Communication World,
22(3), 14-16. Alsop, R. (2004, November 15). In business ranking, some icons lose luster. The Wall Street
Journal, p. B1. Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Badaracco, C. H. (1998). The transparent corporation and organized community. Public
Relations Review, 24(3), 265-278. Black, L. D. & Härtel, C. E. J. (2004). The five capabilities of socially responsible companies.
Journal of Public Affairs, 4(2), 125-144. Bendell, J. (2005). In whose name? The accountability of corporate social responsibility.
Development in Practice, 15(3/4), 362-374. Bivins, T. H. (1989). Ethical implications of the relationship of purpose to role and function
in public relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 65-73. Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspectives on
corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499-513.
Broom, G. M., & Smith, G. D. (1979, Fall). Testing the practitioner’s impact on clients.
Public Relations Review, 5, 47-59. Burson, H. (1996, Fall). The role of the public relations professional. Retrieved November 12,
2004, from: http://www.bm.com/files/insights/IN_FRAME.html Business for Social Responsibility, (2003, October). Overview of corporate social
responsibility. Retrieved November 5, 2004, from: http://www.bsr.org/CSRResources/IssueBriefDetail.cfm?DocumentID=48809
Business for Social Responsibility, (2003, April). Stakeholder engagement. Retrieved
November 4, 2005, from: http://www.bsr.org/BSRResources/IssueBriefDetail.cfm?DocumentID=48813
Cancel, A. E., Cameron, G. T., Sallot, L. M., & Mitrook, M. A. (1997). It depends: A
contingency theory of accommodation in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(1), 31-63.
Cheney, G., & Vibbert, S. L. (1987). Corporate discourse: Public relations and issue
management. In F. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, L. H. Porter, & K. H. Roberts (Eds.),
105
Handbook of organizational communication. An interdisciplinary perspective. (pp. 165-194). Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.
Clark, C. E. (2000). Differences between public relations and corporate social responsibility:
An analysis. Public Relations Review, 26(3), 363-380. Corporate responsibility and public relations. (2005, September). Ethical Corporation.
Council on Economic Priorities. (1998). The corporate report card: Rating 250 of America’s corporations for the socially responsible investor. New York: Penguin.
Covello, V. T. (2003). Principles of risk communication. Seminar conducted at Benjamin
Moore & Co., March 10-11, 2004, Flanders, N.J. Dozier, D. M. (1983). Toward a reconciliation of ‘role conflict’ in public relations research.
Paper presented at the meeting of the Western Communication Educators Conference, Fullerton, CA.
Dozier, D. M. (1992). The organizational roles of communications and public relations
practitioners. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management. (pp. 327-355). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dozier, D. M., & Ehling, W. P. (1992). Evaluation of public relations programs: What the
literature tells us about their effects. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 159-184). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dozier, D., Grunig L.A., & Grunig, J. E. (1995). Manager’s guide to excellence in public
relations and communication management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Duncan, T. R., & Moriarty, S.E. (1998, April). A communication-based marketing model for
managing relationships. Journal of Marketing, 62, 1-13. Edelman, R. (2004, January). Managing corporate risk and reputation. Global Agenda, 127-
128. Eisenberg, E. M., & Goodall, H. L. (1997). Organizational communication: Balancing
creativity and constraint. 2nd Ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (1998). Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self-
presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24(3), 305-311. Finding strategic corporate citizenship: a new game theoretic view. (2004). Harvard Law
Review, 117(6), 1957-1980. Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
106
Friedman, (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase profits.
New York Times Magazine, 87-91. Gillis, T., & Spring, N. (2001). Doing good is good for business. Communication World,
18(6), 23-26. Grow, B., Hamm S., & Lee, L. (2005, September 15). The debate over doing good. Business
Week, 76-78, Grunig, J. E. (1992). Communication, public relations, and effective organizations: An
overview of the book. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 327-355). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Grunig, L.A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective
organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston. Grunig, J. E., & White, J. (1992). The effect of worldviews on public relations. In J. E.
Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 327-355). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gunther, M. (2004). Money and morals at GE. Fortune, 150(1), 176-182. Hatcher, M. (2003). New corporate agendas. Journal of Public Affairs, 3(1), 32-38. Hawken, P. (1993). The ecology of commerce: A declaration of sustainability. New York:
HarperCollins. Heath, R. L. & Ryan, M. (1989). Public relation's role in defining corporate social
responsibility. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 4(1), 21-38. Hedstrom, G., Poltorzycki, S., & Stroh, P. (1998, 4th quarter) Sustainable development: The
next generation of business opportunity. Prism, 5-19. Henderson, D. (2001). The case against ‘corporate social responsibility. Policy, 17(2), 28-32. Henderson, J. (2000). Dissonance or dialogue: changing relations with the corporate sector.
Development in Practice, 10(3/4), 371-376. Hicks, J., Wan, H., & Pfau, M. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Do people really hold
corporations responsible for their actions? Paper presented at the annual conference of AEJMC, New Orleans.
107
Hoog, T. W. (2001, September). The imperative of reputation: how corporate renown
influences ‘the bottom line’. The Counselors Academy, Public Relations Society of America, 1-11.
Ian, D. (2005). The biggest contract. Economist, 375, 69-71 Jemison, D. B. (1984). The importance of boundary spanning roles in strategic decision
making. Journal of Management Studies, 21(2), 131-152. Judd, L. R. (1989, Spring). Credibility, public relations and social responsibility. Public
Relations Review, 15, 34-40. Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: methods for clinical and applied settings.
New York: Oxford University Press. Kitto, J. A. (1998). The evolution of public issues management. Public Relations Quarterly,
43(4), 34-39. Retrieved December 14, 1999 from Expanded Academic ASAP database.
Leichty, G., & Springston, J. (1996). Elaborating public relations roles. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 73(2), 467-477. L’Etang, J. (1996). Corporate responsibility and public relations ethics. In J. L’Etang and M.
Pieczka (Eds.) Critical perspectives in public relations (pp. 82-105). London: ITP. L'Etang, J. (1994). Public relations and corporate social responsibility: Some issues arising.
Journal of Business Ethics, 13(2), 111-123. Mander, J. (1992, Spring). The myth of the corporate conscience. Business and Society
Review, 56-63. Marinetto, M. (1999). The historical development of business philanthropy: Social
responsibility in the new corporate economy. Business History, 41(4), 1-18. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research. 3rd edition.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Martinson, D.L. (1994). Enlightened self-interest fails as an ethical baseline in public
relations. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 9(2), 100-108. Murphy, P. (1991). The limits of symmetry: A game theory approach to symmetric and
asymmetric public relations. Public Relations Research Annual, 3, 115-131. Newell, P. (2005). Citizenship, accountability and community: the limits of the CSR agenda.
International Affairs, 81(3), 541-557.
108
Feagin, J. E., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. (1991). A case for the case study. Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press. Park, J., & Abdeen, A. (1994). Are corporations improving efforts at social responsibility?
Business Forum, 19(3/4), 26-35. Pederson, W. (2005, January 3). Managers must emphasize CSR's value in '05. PR Week, p. 4.
Plowman, K. D. (2005). Conflict, strategic management, and public relations. Public Relations Review, 31, 131-135.
Wrestling with rules and reputations. (2003, November 10). PR Week, pp. 16-22. Rodbourne, D.A., Dercks, L., & Ross, K. (2000, January 30), Ethical carrots and ethical
sticks. Minneapolis Star Tribune, p. D10. Saad, L. (2005, June 1). Military again tops "confidence in institutions" list. Gallup News
Service. Princeton, N.J. Simanis, E. (2000). The Monsanto company (A): Quest for sustainability. In Business
Strategy for a Sustainable World (course pack, BUSI 299P, Stuart Hart, Spring, 2000). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Standish, M. (1997). Unilever (B). In Business Strategy for a Sustainable World (course pack,
BUSI 299P, Stuart Hart, Spring, 2000). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Utting, P. (2005). Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development in
Practice, 15(3/4), 375-388. Walsh, J. P. (1999, November 8). Survey—mastering strategy 7: Business must talk about its
social role. Financial Times (London), p. 8. White, A. L. (1999). Sustainability and the accountable corporation. Environment, 41(8),
30+. Wood, D. J. (1991a). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management
Review, 16(4), 691-718. Wood, D. J. (1991b). Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social
performance. Journal of Management, 17(2), 383-406. Wright, D. K. (1976). Social responsibility in public relations: A multi-step theory. Public
Relations Review, 2, 24-36.
109
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
